Brief of the Case: In the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad, the case of R/CR.MA/7408/2024 involves Dipen Champaklal Shah, who has been charged with tax evasion by allegedly availing ineligible input tax credit amounting to Rs. 6.67 Crores. The charges are based on transactions with several registered entities that are now considered non-existent, leading to tax evasion that exceeds the threshold for arrest as per Section 132 of the GST Act.
Key Quotes:-
– “The present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for regular bail in connection with File No. STO – 3/U – 98/JMR/SEC – 69/VOLT METAL IND / 2023 – 24 / O.W. NO. 17 dated 12.02.2024 registered with State Tax Officer (3) Unit- 98, Jamnagar.”
– “The applicant had purchased the said goods from one M/s. Om Bana Enterprise which is registered at Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu with GST Registration No. 33BNZPM4418H1ZL through valid tax invoices, delivery of the goods had been taken of and the transactions have been done through banking channels.”
– “The complainant has not produced any incriminating material to show that the accused has committed any such offence and there is no direct material linking the applicant to the offence in question.”
– “Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the allegations in the Arrest Memo are absolutely general and vague in nature.”
– “The entire case of the prosecution is based on presumption and assumptions and there is not even an iota of evidence against the applicant.”
– “The arrest memo is totally silent in so far as the details of offences committed by the present applicant is concerned.”
– “No subjective satisfaction is recorded. It is simply states that the applicant has committed offence under Section 132(1)(c) of the GST Act.”
– “Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed grant of regular bail, inter alia, contending that the present applicant was arrested on 12.02.2024 at 23:05 hours under Section 69 of the GST Act on the allegation of commission offence punishment under Section 132(1)(c) of the GST Act vide Arrest Memo dated 12.02.2024.”
– “This Court has also considered punishment prescribed for the offence in question and also considered the fact that the applicant is in custody since 12.02.2024.”
– “In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against the applicant in the FIR, without discussing the evidence in detail, prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail.”
The Court, after considering the arguments and evidence presented, found it appropriate to grant regular bail to the applicant, subject to conditions including a personal bond, surrendering of passport, and monthly reporting to the State Tax Officer. The Court emphasized that the trial Court should not be influenced by the preliminary observations made during the bail hearing.
Author Bio
