Madan Gopal Chaturvedi Vs Directorate of Enforcement (Special Court under P.M.L. Act, Bombay) Admittedly, after praying for calling the opinion and medical papers of Dr. Umesh Shetty, and on going through all the papers Exh.4 (colly.) Ld. S.P.P has not submitted any objection that all these medical papers are fake which are given by Dr. […]
Ld. Counsel for the applicant-accused argued that the accused is aged about 67 years, and having various serious elements. He further argued that the allegations against the applicant-accused are that he receiving the bogus bills without any goods. He further argued that he is ready to co-operate with the investigation. He further argued that there is no useful purpose would be serve to keep the applicant / accused behind bars because trail will take long time and prayed for bail.
He further submitted that the applicant has not played any role in the present offence and has been falsely implicated by the department. He further submitted that this is not a case of applicant being bogus dealer, doing activity of passing fake invoices and fraudulent ITC.
The allegation against the accused is that he was illegally exporting the antique which is said to be the idol of Lord Vishnu. On being satisfied with the grounds urged in the remand application, the accused was sent to the judicial custody.
This court is of considered view that the present accused does not deserves to be released on bail. It is settled preposition of law that economic offences in itself are considered to be gravest offence against the society at large and hence are required to be treated differently in the matter of bail.
The court is in pain to observe that instead of initiating an appropriate action against the delinquent firms in the matter, wherein as per the claim of Delhi Police, a tax evasion of Rs.940 crores is involved, the authorities are involved in the blame game. Unfortunately, none is present on behalf of SGST and even no reply has been filed on behalf of Chairperson, CBIC.
Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) Vs DOMCO Pvt. Ltd. (District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge PC Act CBI, Rouse Avenue) 1. Chargesheet: – A-1 company had given applications dated NIL to Ministry of Coal (hereinafter referred as MoC) and Ministry of Steel (hereinafter referred as MoS) for captive coking block mentioning that the company […]
On behalf of department, application is opposed submitting that accused have utilized and availed fraudulent ineligible ITC to the tune of Rs 15 crates as such committed a serous economic offence.
The Applicant is accused of procuring bogus bills from companies that did not exist in order to claim Input Tax Credit (ITC) and hence was taken into Judicial Custody (JC). The Applicant thereby has contended that the companies in question have ceased to manufacture goods but have not ceased to exist in entirety. Furthermore, the Applicant also contended that he was not provided with any reason or grounds before his arrest and hence, the Applicant is entitled to bail.
DRI Vs Atul Gupta (Patiala House Court) It was held that the decision interpreting the word “Magistrate” to be Judicial/Metropolitan Magistrate seemed flawed and it was categorically held that it is an Executive function. Thereby, giving strength to the decision of this Court about the application not being maintainable before this Court. This Court also […]
