SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Del) 42

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Amit Bansal, J.
Directorate General of Gst Intelligence - Appellant
Versus
Jitender Kumar - Respondent
Crl.M.C. 4528 of 2023 and Crl.M.C. 4529 of 2023 & Crl.M.A. 17313 of 2023 (Stay)
Decided On : 19-01-2024

Advocates appeared:
Mr.Satish Aggarwala, Senior Standing Counsel and Mr.Anurag Ojha, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr.Gagan Vaswani, Advocate, for the Petitioner.
Mr.Tanmay Mehta, Mr.Vijay Kasana, Mr.Kshitij Chhabra and Mr.Chirag Verma, Advocates, for the Respondent.

IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized the importance of considering the accused's cooperation in the investigation and clean antecedents in granting anticipatory bail, and highlighted the significance of complying with bail conditions.

Headnote:

GST Fraud - Anticipatory Bail - Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) - Section 132(1)(b) and (c) - Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 70 of the CGST Act

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI), sought setting aside of the order granting anticipatory bail to the respondent accused Jitender Kumar, who was involved in a GST fraud case.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that Jitender Kumar was not the main player in the fraud, had clean antecedents, and had cooperated in the investigation. The court sustained the grant of anticipatory bail to Jitender Kumar and dismissed the petitions filed by DGGI.

Issues: The issues revolved around the grant of anticipatory bail, compliance with bail conditions, and the involvement of the accused in the GST fraud.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the provisions of Section 438 of the CrPC could be invoked for granting anticipatory bail, and the accused's cooperation in the investigation and clean antecedents were considered in sustaining the bail. The court also emphasized the importance of complying with bail conditions.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the petitions filed by DGGI and confirmed the anticipatory bail granted to Jitender Kumar, with a warning to comply with the bail conditions and appear pursuant to summons issued by DGGI.

JUDGMENT

1. CRL.M.C.4529/2023 has been filed by the petitioner Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) seeking setting aside of the order dated 2nd February, 2023, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ), Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, granting anticipatory bail to the respondent accused Jitender Kumar.

2. CRL.M.C.4528/2023 has been filed by the petitioner DGGI seeking setting aside of the order dated 24th April, 2023, whereby the learned ASJ has dismissed the petition filed on behalf of the DGGI seeking cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the respondent on 2nd February, 2023.

3. Brief facts, as agitated by the DGGI, are as follows:

3.1. The officers of DRI Gandhidham and DGGI, acting on intelligence, intercepted 21 containers carrying smoking mixtures from Mundra Port, Gujarat on 3rd October, 2022. The samples taken therefrom were sent to the Central Revenues Control Laboratory (CRCL), Kandla, wherein it was revealed that the aforesaid smoking mixture was a spurious product and not fit for human consumption.

3.2. Investigation was started and summons were issued to the exporter company, M/s Harsha International. However, the proprietor of M/s Harsha International, the present respondent, Jitender Kumar, did not comply with the aforesaid summons.

3.3. During search of the registered premises of M/s Harsha International, it was revealed that no business activity relating to export was being carried out and a kirana store was being operated by the father of Jitender Kumar, from the registered place of business.

3.4. During the course of investigation, it was found that M/s Radiant Traders, the manufacturers of smoking mixtures, had supplied the smoking mixture to M/s Harsha International. Upon search, it was found that no business activity was being conducted from the registered premises of M/s Radiant Traders and no goods or plant or machinery was found at their premises.

3.5. Subsequently, statement of the proprietor of M/s Radiant Traders, Manish Goyal, was recorded under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act), wherein he stated that no smoking mixtures have been supplied by his firm to M/s Harsha International.

3.6. The co-accused Manish Goyal was arrested on 25th November, 2022 under the allegations of having committed offences under Section 132(1)(b) and (c) of the CGST Act.

3.7. The co-accused Manish Goyal preferred a bail application before the learned ASJ, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, which was allowed vide order dated 21st December, 2022 and he was released on regular bail.

3.8. Jitender Kumar preferred an anticipatory bail before the learned ASJ, which was granted vide order dated 2nd February, 2023.

3.9. The DGGI moved an application before the Sessions Court, seeking cancellation of the aforesaid anticipatory bail on the grounds of violation of the conditions mentioned therein, which was dismissed by the learned ASJ vide order dated 24th April, 2023.

4. Senior Standing Counsels appearing on behalf of the DGGI have made the following submissions:

I. The Sessions Court could not have granted anticipatory bail to Jitender Kumar in view of the recent order dated 17th July, 2023 passed by the Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) No. 42124213 of 2019 titled State of Gujarat v. Choodamani Parmeshwaran Iyer, wherein it was observed that provisions of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) are not applicable to cases involving offences under the CGST Act.

II. Jitender Kumar is involved in a serious economic offence relating to evasion of Goods and Services Tax (GST) to the tune of Rs.218 crores.

III. In the present case, Input Tax Credit has been shown to be received on the basis of procurement of cigarettes which have been shown to be used as raw material to manufacture smoking mixture. It is pertinent to note that the prices of cigarettes are very high when compared to loose tobacco. Therefore, the aforesaid method is neither economically viable nor technica

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top