Page 68 - GSTL_23rd July 2020_Vol 38_Part 4

434 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 38
2. Heard Learned Counsel for the parties.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the co-accused peti-
tioners were arrested on 1st March, 2019 and a complaint has been filed in the
Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Economic Offences), Jaipur for offence
under Sections 132(1)(b), (c), (f), (j) and (i) of the Central Goods and Services Tax
Act, 2017. After having conducted investigation as against the accused petition-
ers, the documents have already been seized and have been placed before the
concerned Court. Learned Counsel has invited attention of this Court to the list
of documents and description, which are in all 87 in number. Learned Counsel
submits that the allegation against the petitioners is of having issued invoices
giving benefit to companies who availed benefit of of ITC (Input Tax Credit). A
list of the said companies have been mentioned in the complaint which are 36 in
number. However, no action has been taken as against the concerned persons of
the said companies. Learned Counsel submits that no further investigation is
required to be conducted as against the accused petitioners and they are in judi-
cial custody since long. Learned Counsel submits that under the CGST Act, the
case is compoundable and maximum punishment which can be awarded is only
five years. The petitioners have already remained in jail for the last 450 days.
Learned Counsel also submits that in the reply filed by the respondents, it has
been stated that they are conducting an investigation against more than 1300
beneficiaries, which is likely to take long time.
4. Learned Counsel further submits that in view of the COVID-19 Pan-
demic, the petitioners be released on bail with certain conditions.
5. Learned Counsel relies on the judgment in the case of Sanjay Chandra
v. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in 2012 (1) SCC 40 as well as the order
passed by the Coordinate Bench at Principal Seat at Jodhpur in the case of Gaurav
Maheshwari v. State (S.B. Criminal Misc. IInd Bail Application No. 1825/2020),
decided on 11-5-2020 [2020 (38) G.S.T.L. 178 (Raj.)] and Gaurav Maheshwari v.
State (S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 1422/2020), decided on 13-5-2020
submits that the petitioner may be given the similar benefit and similar condi-
tions may be laid down, which the petitioners will abide.
6. Per contra, Learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue strongly op-
poses the bail application and submits that the petitioners have committed a
huge economic offence and huge amount of CGST has been evaded resulting a
huge loss of revenue since fraudulent and forged invoices were issued in relation
to 34 companies, petitioners created ghost companies which were fraudulent and
created only for the purpose of issuing such invoices resulted in giving benefit to
as many as 1878 customers in different 21 States. Learned Counsel submits that
out of the said customers, 321 customers are those who are residing outside Raja-
sthan.
7. Learned Counsel submits that the Revenue Department has recov-
ered Rs. 30 crore from such customers, who wrongly availed of the benefit of
ITC. Learned Counsel submits that as regards the case being registered against
the said beneficiaries since the provisions is only where the benefit has been
wrongfully obtained from more than 5 crore and otherwise the case is bailable.
The department in the process of conducting further investigation in regard to
others. On being asked by this Court with regard to any particular investigation,
which is pending as against the accused petitioners, Learned Counsel frankly
states that there is no such investigation as against the accused petitioners, who
are in judicial custody. However, he says that they are likely to cause interference
GST LAW TIMES  23rd July 2020  68