Page 62 - GSTL_18th June 2020_Vol 37_Part 3

276 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 37
indulging in evasion of tax to the tune of Rs. 36 crores. The Special Public Prose-
cutor submits that in the course of investigation, if it is found that this petitioner
is guilty of evasion of tax, on compliance of Section 70 of the GST Act, the peti-
tioner would be arrested and the release of the petitioner under Section 438
Cr.P.C would hinder the investigation. It is evident from the record and the
submissions made by both sides that there is apprehension of arrest of the peti-
tioner for the non-bailable offences alleged in the subject crime. The main ac-
cused in this case is a corporate body. The financial matters are being dealt with
by the Chief Financial Officer. Furthermore, the petitioner is not directly liable to
pay the taxes imposed by the Government from time to time. There is no record
to substantiate the prima facie involvement of the petitioner in the subject criminal
case. The arrest and detention of the petitioner would damage his reputation.
The allegations are not grave and the gravity of the offences is not so high to de-
ny bail to the petitioner under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. Furthermore, it cannot be
said that the petitioner would abscond and flee from justice. There are no cir-
cumstances to hold that the petitioner would indulge in tampering the records
and influence the witnesses. The Chief Financial Officer of the said company was
arrested and detained for about 30 days in judicial custody. In the course of in-
vestigation so far incriminating material is also collected. So the petitioner is not
required for custodial investigation. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for relief
under Section 438 of Cr.P.C as mentioned hereunder.
10. Under these circumstances, the respondents are directed to release
the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest, on his executing a personal bond
for a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakhs only) with two sureties in a like
sum each to the satisfaction of the respondent No. 2, i.e., Senior Intelligence Of-
ficer, O/o. Director General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence, Hyderabad
Zonal Unit, Hyderabad.
11. The Criminal Petition is, accordingly, allowed.
12. Pending Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
_______

2020 (37) G.S.T.L. 276 (Mad.)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C. Saravanan, J.
SUPRASESH GENERAL INSURANCE SERVICE & BROKERS
(P) LTD.
SUPRASESH GENERAL INSURANCE SERVICE & BROKERS
Versus
ASSTT. COMMR./DESIGNATED AUTHORITY (VCES),
CHENNAI
ASSTT. COMMR.
W.P. No. 11386 of 2014, decided on 13-3-2020
Service Tax Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Scheme, 2013 -
Rejection of declaration - Six different periodical show cause notices issued to
assessee for period commencing from 16-7-2001 to September, 2011 - All notic-
es deal with demand for Service Tax on commission paid (retained) by
assessee in course of provision of reinsurance business to foreign insurance
companies - Scheme intended for only those Service Tax defaulters who had
GST LAW TIMES  18th June 2020  62