Delhi HC upholds Bail of ₹61 Crore GST ITC Fraud Accused, Notes Fulfilment of Triple Test Conditions of Bail [Read Order]
The Delhi High Court concluded that there was no justifiable reason to interfere with the bail order granted by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and dismissed the petition.
![Delhi HC upholds Bail of ₹61 Crore GST ITC Fraud Accused, Notes Fulfilment of Triple Test Conditions of Bail [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2025/07/29/2070377-delhi-hc-upholds-bail-gst-itc-fraud-accused-notes-fulfilment-triple-test-conditions-bail-taxscan.webp "Delhi HC upholds Bail of ₹61 Crore GST ITC Fraud Accused, Notes Fulfilment of Triple Test Conditions of Bail [Read Order]")
The Delhi High Court has recently dismissed a petition filed by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) challenging the grant of bail to an accused who was deemed to have orchestrated a scheme to fraudulently avail Input Tax Credit (ITC) amounting to approximately ₹61.02 crore under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The DGGI gathered intelligence that four companies -...
The Delhi High Court has recently dismissed a petition filed by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) challenging the grant of bail to an accused who was deemed to have orchestrated a scheme to fraudulently avail Input Tax Credit (ITC) amounting to approximately ₹61.02 crore under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
The DGGI gathered intelligence that four companies - M/s Aastha Apparels Pvt. Ltd., M/s JBB Apparels Pvt. Ltd., M/s JBN Apparels Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Nautilus Metal Craft Pvt. Ltd were fraudulently availing ITC based on invoices generated using the identities of fictitious and non-functional firms.
The fraudulently availed ITC credits were allegedly used to pay Integrated GST on export of goods and to claim refunds from the government. Investigations revealed that these entities were owned or controlled by the respondent, Rakesh Kumar Goyal.
All-in-One Manual with Updated GST Laws & Provisions, Click here
The respondent’s earlier two bail applications had been rejected at a stage when the investigation was ongoing, with the bail being granted on the third attempt.
The DGGI, represented by Satish Aggarwala and Gagan Vaswani, contended before the Delhi High Court that the respondent had been habitually non-cooperative with the investigation, had failed to provide relevant data, and was also a repeat offender with past involvement in customs-related cases.
They further argued that there was no change in circumstances between the rejection of the second and acceptance of the third bail application within a month’s span, thus undermining judicial propriety.
The respondent, represented by Shadman Ahmed Sidiiqui asserted that the grant of bail was justified as it followed the filing of the complaint, thus constituting a substantial change in circumstances from earlier bail rejections.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
