RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT | Bail Dismissed in Case of Wrong Availment of GST ITC

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY CHATURVEDI

order

06/12/2019

The present Misc bail application under section 439 Cr.P.C. is preferred by the Accused/petitioner in the matter of Complaint Case No. IV(6)78/AE/Alwar/2019/Part-II dated 22.10.2019 registered at Central Goods and Services Tax Commissionerate, Alwar (Raj.) for the offences under
Sections 132 (1)(b)(c) & (d) of the Central Goods Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act of 2017’). Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the accused petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case as

no offence under Section 132(1)(b)(c) & (d) of the Act, 2017, is made out. It is further submitted that the Department has invoked the provision of Section 132 of the Act of 2017, without first determining the tax liability and thereby concluded that the petitioner has committed the alleged offence. No show cause notice was issued to the petitioner. The allegations made against the accused petitioner goes to show that bailable offence is made out as provided under Section 132(4) read with Section 132(5) of the Act. In this connection, learned counsel for the petitioner drawn the attention of the Court to the arrest memo. It was submitted that in the arrest memo, the word ‘fraudulently’ has been mentioned which shows that the offence alleged to have been committed by the accused petitioner is bailable offence. It was further submitted that the period under investigation for
the alleged offence is from July, 2017 to March, 2018 when the petitioner was not Managing Director of the Company. The petitioner was never involved in the day-to-day affairs of the Company and the same was managed by his father, Shri Brij Raj Punj. The petitioner was never aware of the commission of offence. There is no cogent evidence to
connect the accused petitioner with the alleged offence. It was also submitted that out of the alleged demand by the department, the company already revised the credit by way of issuing Credit Note and as a result the position has become neutral. The Company has already paid an additional amount

Download Full Judgement


Spread the love

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *