The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted bail to the accused in the matter of fraudulent procurement of Rs 29 lakhs value added tax (VAT) refund by the use of false and fabricated documents.
During the assessment period 2011-12, this dealer fraudulently obtained refund of `29,29,035/- by using false and fabricated documents, including sale invoices of cigarettes regarding interstate sales to Rajasthan, VAT D-3 forms showing the sale of cement/tiles, and ‘C’ forms bearing particular serial numbers. These refunds were obtained by using the specified C forms procured from the dealers of Rajasthan, who used to deal in the trading of tax-free commodities, i.e., khal, binola, etc., claiming interstate sales of cigarettes against the said C forms.
The counsel who appeared for petitioner Mahesh Kumar, submitted that the said petitioner is just a commission agent, who during the course of his business transactions, erroneously contravened the provisions of Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 and for such violation, the FIR was initially registered against Madan Lal, the proprietor of M/s J.C. Enterprises Ltd. and that final report under Section 173 CrPC has already been presented in the Court after conclusion of investigation and that co-accused Gopi Chand Chaudhary has already been allowed bail by the Court.
On behalf of petitioner-Ashok Sukhija, it was contended by the counsel that petitioner had joined his services at Sirsa on 02.07.2013, whereas the case in hand pertains to refund for the year 2011-12. It is Sh. D.P. Beniwal, the then Excise and Taxation Officer, who was responsible for conducting the physical verification of the firm, examine the returns and verify documents of the firm.
The counsels further contended that entire case is dependent upon documentary evidence; that investigation already stands concluded and there is no prospect of any of the petitioners absconding from justice and so, they be allowed regular bail, inasmuch as co-accused Gopi Chand Chaudhary has already been allowed bail by the Court.
A Single Bench of Justice Deepak Gupta observed that “At the same time, it is not disputed even by the ld. State counsel that FIR pertains to the bogus refund of input tax credit in respect of Assessment Year 2011-12, in which the alleged loss of `29,29,359/- to the State exchequer was finalized at least on 11.11.2014 in revision order, as is mentioned in the FIR itself. No explanation is given in the FIR about the delay of more than 5 years so as to write a letter to the Superintendent of Police, Sirsa on 11.12.2019 to take action against the culprits and then another approximately one year for getting the FIR registered on 24.10.2020.”
“No purpose shall be served by keeping the petitioners detained, particularly when no apprehension has been expressed by ld. State counsel that if released on bail, petitioners may abscond from justice. Having regard to all the facts and circumstances as noted above, but without commenting anything further on merits of the case, petitioners are admitted to regular bail on their furnishing requisite bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, by observing usual terms and conditions.”
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
