IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized the necessity of substantial evidence for serious charges under the GST Act and the accused's right to a fair trial.

ORDER :

1. This bail application has been filed by the accused petitioner u/S 483 BNSS in connection with a Case F. No. DGGI/INV/GST/123/2023-Gr. F.O/o ADG-DGGI-Jaipur, registered at Directorate General of Goods and Service Tax Intelligence, Jaipur Zonal Unit, Jaipur for the offence punishable under section 132(1)(b) (c), (f), (l) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘the Act of 2017’).

2. The facts in brief of the matter are that a Case F. No. DGGI/INV/GST/123/2023-Gr. F.O/o ADG-DGGI-Jaipur, was registered at Directorate General of Goods and Service Tax Intelligence, Jaipur Zonal Unit, Jaipur for the offence punishable under section (c), (f), (l) of the Act of 2017 on the basis of statement of one Ashutosh Gupta recorded under section 70 of the Act of 2017 wherein it has been stated that the accused petitioner has created fake firms and has issued goods/ invoices and has pass on the input tax credit which is prescribed under section 16 of the Act of 2017, and therefore, the contravention of said provision is an offence under section 132 of the Act of 2017.

3. During the course of investigation, notice was issued to the accused petitioner for recording his statement and also to submit the documents under the provision of section 70 of the Act of 2017.

4. The complaint was filed under section 190 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for offences punishable under sections 174 and 175 IPC stating that the accused petitioner is neither appearing for recording his statement and nor submitting the documents in pursuance of notice issued to him. The said complaint was filed on 02.09.2024 before the concerned Magistrate and requested to take cognizance.

5. After arresting the petitioner and making investigation, the Enforcement Officer Goods and Service Tax Directorate, Jaipur Unit, Jaipur submitted the complaint before the Special Court against the accused petitioner for the offence punishable under section 132(1) of the Act of 2017 stating that in the statements of one Ashutosh Garg recorded on 31.10.2023 and 1.11.2023 during investigation of case number registered at DGGIJZU bearing No. F. F. No. DGGI/INV/GST/123/2023-Gr. F.O/o ADG-ZU-Jaipur. In the aforesaid statements he is said to have that he has created 70-80 fake firms and given to one Anil Garg and the accused petitioner-Pankaj Aggarwal in lieu of Rs.5 lakh each and he is further said to have stated that he used to file the return, however, accused petitioner Pankaj Aggarwal used to issue the invoices of scrap, hosiery, paper products etc. and on the basis of his statements, investigation was started and during investigation Anil Garg is said to have admitted this fact that he has issued the fake invoices in the names of seven firms so as to pass on input tax credit amount amounting to Rs. 1032 crore.

6. Accused petitioner Pankaj Aggarwal is said to have appeared for recorded his statement under section 70 of the Act of 2017 and he is said to have stated that he used to issue fake invoices to pass on the input tax credit on a commission of 0.10 percent.

7. The search was made and various documents related to fake firms were recovered from certain premises. Certain What’s Apps also said to have been taken on record to substantiate the allegations against the accused petitioner. It is also stated in the complaint that the statements of Ravi Kumar who is said to be the employee of the accused petitioner was also recorded and so also the statement of one Manish Tayal. It is also alleged that certain documents were also recovered from the Laptop of Ahusosh Gupta in the name of Pankaj Bhaiya alleged to be present petitioner who is also said to have substantiated the allegations against the accused petitioner. The documents were also recovered on 09.12.2023 while making search at the premises and one Ravi Kumar said that all these documents are related to the accused petitioner. It is also alleged that Manish Tayal and Ravi Kumar were working for the accused petiti