TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 807X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s firms. All are made accused in the present case. However, so far as the present applicant is concerned, admittedly he is one of the partner in M/s Martiz Cera against which allegations of tax evasion are to the tune of ₹ 32 Lakhs. So, far as other firms namely M/s Himat Trading and M/s Action Industries are concerned, same are respectively of the proprietorship of father and brother of the applicant. It is not the case of the respondent that the father and brother of the applicant were not managing the affairs of those firms and were not aware of the transactions of those firms - applicant is ready and willing to deposit the amount of ₹ 32 Lakhs with the respondent within a period of four weeks from today so far as the liab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egion. Accordingly, investigation was carried out and on investigation and searches carried out at different places including the entities namely M/s Action Industries, M/s Himat Trading Co., M/s Martiz Cera M/s Satyavijay Enterprise, it was found that the applicant had received and then supplied invoices without actual receipt and supply of goods resulting in the evasion of GST to the tune of ₹ 18.04 Crores. Present applicant is one of the partner of M/s Martiz Cera. 3. It is submitted by the Ld. Counsel for the applicant that the present applicant-accused has not played any role in the present offence and has been falsely implicated by the Department. It is submitted that the officials were provided with the documents sought by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vestigation and is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. Ld. counsel for the applicant further submits that the respondent has issued summons to the applicant on 12/02/2021, 05/03/2021 and 28/04/2021 for recording of his statements and the applicant apprehends that he too will be arrested if would appear in response to the summons of the respondent. It is submitted that the respondent department so far has not filed any complaint before the Competent Court in respect of the offences alleged. It is further submitted that so far as the present applicant is concerned, he is only a partner in M/s Martiz Cera and the allegations against Martiz Cera are of tax evasion to the tune of around Rs. Thirty Two Lakhs and the applicant is read ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ature and the applicant has availed Input Tax Credit to the tune of ₹ 18.04 crores without actually receiving the goods on the basis of invoices raised by the firms which were not in existence and were fake thus causing a huge loss to the state exchequer. Further, cash amount of ₹ 99,35,000/- sent by Virat Dhanjibhai Bhatiya through his brother-in-law to the father of the applicant was also recovered by the officials. It is further submitted that though on paper, applicant is the partner in only Martiz Cera, he is actively involved in the affairs of the firms of his father and brother namely M/s Himat Trading and M/s Action Industries and the evasion of tax through all of the above-mentioned firms. It is submitted that Sec.16 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... actual supply of goods. It is submitted that huge loss have been caused to the Government by virtue of fraudulent utilization of Input Tax Credit in conspiracy and connivance with co-accused persons and as such the applicant is not entitled to any relief. Ld. counsel has further relied upon the judgement of Hon ble Supreme Court passed in the matter of Nimmagadda Prasad V/s. C.B.I., Hyderabad and argued that the economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail and not to be viewed seriously. Ld. Spl. P.P. has thus prayed for rejection of the anticipatory bail. He, however, has conceded that so far as Martiz Cera is concerned, allegations of tax evasion are only to the tun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bail to the applicant in similar type of case on deposit of amount of ₹ 1 Crore. Further, in Darshan Dinesh Patel Vs. Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax, the bail was granted on deposit of ₹ 25 Lakh. 8. Further keeping in view the orders passed by the Hon'ble High Court in other matters relied upon by the Ld. Counsel for the applicant in similar circumstances, I deem it fit to exercise discretion in favour of the applicant for grant of bail under section 438 of Cr. P. C.. O R D E R In view of the facts stated above, the present Anticipatory Bail applicant filed by the applicant is allowed. It is ordered that in case the applicant herein is arrested in connection with Case No. (DGGI/RRU/12(4)-14/2020 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
