Fraudulent Claim of ITC: Delhi HC grants Bail to GST Accused [Read Order]

ITC - Delhi HC - grants Bail - GST Accused - taxscan

The Delhi High Court has granted bail to a GST accused in relation to a case of fraudulent claim of input tax credit considering that the accused has already undergone 9 months in custody.

Justice Prateek Jalan was considering an application by Mr. Pulkit, who has sought bail in respect of the offence of setting up a number of fictitious companies, which were being used for the purposes of defrauding the government. The accused have allegedly opened bank accounts in fictitious names and provided their telephone numbers and email addresses.

Granting bail to the accused, the Court held that the chargesheet and a supplementary chargesheet having been filed, the applicant is entitled to bail in the facts and circumstances of the case. From the Status Report quoted above, it appears that the main link of the present applicant with the transactions in question is on the basis of the use of the mobile No. 9015824684 and his email address. As far as the mobile number in question is concerned, the chargesheet and the Status Report reveal that it was transferred to the applicant only on 13.03.2018.

“In the Status Report, the prosecution has made out a case that the applicant, in conspiracy with Shubham Khandelwal, had registered various bogus firms and opened fictitious bank accounts. The events mentioned in paragraphs 7 and 8 all relate to the year 2017. There is no suggestion in the Status Report that the applicant neither has prior criminal antecedents nor is there any material to suggest that he is a flight risk. The applicant has been in custody for a period of approximately nine months since 14.07.2021. The evidence in the present case is largely documentary, and has already been placed before the Trial Court. The chances of the applicant tampering with the evidence are therefore unlikely.”

Relying on the Supreme Court decision in Chandra vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, the Court held that the seriousness of the offenses alone is not conclusive of the applicant’s entitlement to bail.

Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates

taxscan-loader