The Madhya Pradesh High Court refused to grant bail to persons allegedly involved in Customs Duty evasion by undervaluing invoices.
The applicants, Hitesh Nagwani and Sanjay are running the business of import through their proprietary firm M/s. Rudra Overseas, Indore. The petitioners are engaged in the business of importing nutrition supplements.
It has been alleged against them that the applicants were found to be involved in wide scale duty evasion by undervaluing invoices of the goods, which were imported by them and for this purpose, a dummy firm M/s. Rax Trading Limited, Hong Kong was also formed by them with Sanjay Panjabi being its sole Director.
During the search in the premises of the applicants, it was found that an unaccounted sum of Rs.82,67,900 plus USD 5,000 were seized from Hitesh Nagwani where from the possession of Sanjay certain incriminating documents were seized.
Statements of the accused persons were also recorded under Section 108 of the Act wherein they have also admitted to have committed the aforesaid offence by undervaluing the invoices and evading duty.
Mr. V.S. Negi, Senior Counsel appearing for the applicants has vehemently argued that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case, as they have already deposited a sum of Rs.7,53,643 with the respondent.
Mr. Negi submitted that offence as alleged against the applicants are bailable under Section 104 read with Section 135 of the Act, as the alleged value even as per the department’s claim is Rs.86,22,912 and actual customs duty minus Integrated Goods Service Tax (IGST), according to the Department is Rs.37,94,083.
On the other hand, Counsel for the respondent Mr. Chandan Airen, opposed the prayer and submitted that no case for grant of bail is made out, as both the applicants are habitual offenders, as against them a of duty evasion has also been registered by DRI, Hyderabad Zone, Hyderabad (Telangana State).
The single-judge bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar opined that since the charge is yet to be filed and one of the accused persons namely Uttam is still at large, it would not be appropriate for this Court to release the applicant at this stage of the investigation.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. We welcome your comments at info@taxscan.in
