The Gujarat High Court has granted bail to accused person allegedly involved in GST evasion of 10.29 Cr. scam.
Two firms under the proprietorship of the present applicant – Mohsin Salimbhai Qureshi namely M/s. Alina Traders and M/s. Galaxy Traders have availed and utilised ITC of Rs.8.18 crore and Rs.2.11 crore respectively on the basis of invoices issued by M/s. S.K. Traders, which is non-existing firm which in turn received Rs.10.36 crore from another non-existent firm i.e. M/s. Ronak Traders which has no GSTR-2A, without receipt of goods mentioned therein and since the entire payment has been made through utilization of ITC which was not legally available to both these firms, and therefore no tax has been paid in respect of the invoices issued by these two firms and therefore the availing of ITC of Rs.10.29 crore was not admissible as per section 16(2)[(b) & (c)] of CGST Act, 2017.
The applicant was arrested on 01.09.2021 under the provisions of section 69 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. After completion of investigation the accused is charged with offences punishable under sections 132(1)(b), 132(1(c) read with section 132(1)(i) & 132(5) of the CGST, 2017 and section 132(1) (b), 132(1)(c) read with section 132(1)(i) & 132(5) of the Gujarat GST Act, 2017 and section 120B of the IPC.
The applicant had preferred regular bail, however, the same came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by the same, the applicant haspreferred appeal before The Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad which also came to be rejected. Hence,he presents application before The Honorable High Court of Gujarat.
It was observed by the High Court that the course of action adopted for investigation and necessary statements were recorded. The statement of the applicant was also recorded while visiting him in the judicial custody. The details of manipulations by the present applicant are stated to have been found during the investigation. The shell companies’ details have been recorded. The facts of the money transferred through Shroff firms and the same being tuned back to him, has been found during the investigation and the charge sheet in the form of complaint shows the applicant as the mastermind operating fake firms to defraud the government exchequer.
The single bench of Justice Gita Gopi by giving reliance to the decision of Supreme Court in case of
Sanjay Chandra Vs. CBI, [2012 1 SCC 40], has referred the case of State of Kerala Vs. Raneef, [(2011) 1 SCC784], to observe that in deciding the bail applications an important factor which should certainly be taken into consideration by the court is the delay in concluding the trial. Here, taking into consideration the course of investigation adopted by the Department, the evidence, so collected, the trial will take considerable time and it may happen, if denied bail, the judicial custody be prolonged beyond the statutory period of punishment which is for five years.
It was held that, “Taking into consideration the provisions of law and the fact that the Commissioner is empower to recover the due amount and propose for abating the proceedings and as the trial will take its own time to conclude, hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail”
MOHSIN SALIMBHAI QURESHI vs STATE OF GUJARAT
CITATION:
CITATION: 2022 TAXSCAN (HC) 119
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
