No Criminal History and willingness to Pay Compounding Fee: Allahabad HC Grants Bail to Accused in GST Evasion Case [Read Order]
The court, without commenting on the merits of the case, allowed the bail application and ordered the release of the applicant on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the trial court
Bail to Accused in GST Evasion Case
Bail to Accused in GST Evasion Case
The Allahabad High Court has granted bail to an accused in a GST evasion case, noting that the offence is compoundable, the applicant has no criminal antecedents, and has expressed willingness to pay the compounding fee.
The Court observed that these factors were sufficient to enlarge the applicant on bail without prejudicing the merits of the case.
The bail plea was filed by Nitin Dwivedi, who was arrested on 18 June 2025 in connection with a case registered under Section 132 of the Central Goods andServices Tax (CGST) Act at Police Station DGGI, District Lucknow. He was accused of evading GST by fraudulently claiming false input tax credit.
The counsel for the applicant argued that the offence under Section 132 of the CGST Act is punishable with imprisonment of up to five years and fine, but is nonetheless compoundable.
It was further submitted that the applicant had no criminal history, had been falsely implicated, and was willing to cooperate with the investigation and trial, including paying the compounding fee to settle the liability.
On the other hand, counsel representing the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) opposed the bail plea, contending that tax evasion is an economic offence against the public at large as it adversely impacts the nation’s growth.
The Department pointed out that such offences are serious and have wide consequences. However, it conceded that the offence is legally compoundable.
After considering the submissions and the fact that the applicant had been in custody since 18 June 2025, Justice Subhash Vidyarthi held that his lack of criminal history, readiness to cooperate, and willingness to compound the offence were relevant factors warranting bail.
The court, without commenting on the merits of the case, allowed the bail application and ordered the release of the applicant on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the trial court.
The bench also imposed conditions, directing the applicant not to tamper with prosecution evidence, not to pressurize witnesses, and to remain present on all trial dates unless specifically exempted by the court.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
