Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + HC GST - 2024 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (3) TMI 168 - HC - GSTSeeking grant of bail - availment of credit without actual movement of goods on the basis of forged and fictitious documents of suppliers, procured from various non-existing firms - HELD THAT:- This Court finds that there is no dispute that prima facie, applicant is involved in availing excess input tax credit as well as cancellation of e-way bill of the huge value by the proprietorship of his firm without any reasonable reason. The department has already issued notice under Section 70 and 74 of the GST Act against the firm of the applicant. Further the record reveals that till date no adjudication order has been passed by the competent authority quantifying the excess availing the input tax credit. The record further reveals that neither any order has been passed by the competent authority cancelling the registration of selling dealer in question nor the registration of the applicant’s firm has been cancelled. Section 69 read with section 132 of the Act provides for punishment of wrong availment of input tax credit with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years and fine. It further provides that every second or thereof all the offense committed by the registered person shall be punishable. Further Section 138 of GST Act provides the compounding all the offence committed by the registered person being caused after payment of tax and interest to the amount of such wrong availment of input tax credit - the Commissioner is empowered to recover the due amount and propose for abating the proceedings and as the trial will take its own time to conclude, this Court finds this to be a fit case where discretion could be exercised in favour of the applicant. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, argument advanced on behalf of the parties, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of DATARAM SINGH VERSUS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR. [2018 (2) TMI 410 - SUPREME COURT] and recent judgement of the Apex Court in the case of SATENDER KUMAR ANTIL VERSUS CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR. [2022 (8) TMI 152 - SUPREME COURT] and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Let the applicant namely Qamar Ahmed Kazmi be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to conditions imposed and further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified - The bail application is allowed.
|