The Patiala House Court refused to grant bail to a person accused of fraudulently availing Input Tax Credit (ITC).
The applicant, Rakesh Kumar Goel who is the director of the various companies and the companies are recognised as MESME, filed the second bail application who is accused of fraudulently availing ITC.
The application seeking bail has been founded primarily on two grounds parity with other accused persons who are enlarged on bail and change in circumstances after the dismissal of the earlier bail application.
With respect to the ground of parity, the law is well settled that in a similarly Situated situation if one or more accused persons are released on bail then the remaining accused is/are also entitled for bail.
However, the court observed that in the present conspectus, the case of the accused is distinguishable from the other as serious allegations of non-cooperation and sealing hindrance in the investigation are leveled against him.
Even at this juncture, the accused is indirectly creating troubles in the ongoing investigation by not supplying the requisite information as his sons, who happen to be Directors in the firm are still eluding the investigation despite service of summons to appear before the department.
The fact of non-cooperation by the accused is also observed by ASJ while declining bail application. This conduct of the accused renders his case different from the other accused and he loses the right on being released on bail on parity.
So far as the change in circumstances is concerned, after the dismissal of the previous bail application, the standard required to establish the changed circumstances is of “exceptionality”.
It is a matter of record that the previous bail application of the accused was dismissed recently. The application does not specifically outline the exceptional nature of changed circumstances.
Therefore, the Court dismissed the second bail application of the accused.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment
