Economic offences involving organized fraud, particularly those resulting in substantial loss to the public exchequer, require a strict approach in bail adjudication, especially when statutory provisions expressly restrict compounding of such offences.

Order on Board

1. These are the first bail applications filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants in connection with Crime No. AD220126006503S registered at Directorate General of Goods and Service Tax Intelligence Raipur Zonal Unit for offence under Sections 35 read with Sections 132 (1) (b), 132 (1) (c) and 132 (1) (f) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 in MCRCA No. 353 of 2026 and Section 132 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 in MCRCA No. 368 of 2026.

2. Case of the prosecution, in MCRCA No. 353 of 2026 is that M/s Shrishti Construction, a proprietor firm engaged in trading of goods, has wrongly availed Input Tax Credit (for short, ITC) without receiving actual goods and thereafter passed on the same to several down chain units without supplying any actual goods. While initiating the investigation, no firm by the name of M/s Shrishti Construction, Devpuri, Raipur was operating or working at the principal place of business declared by the inspection or no business activities were found. When contacted on the mobile number provided in the GST registration, Premdas Pannika identified himself as the proprietor of M/s Shristi Construction. In his statement under Section 70 of the CGST Act, he stated that he had met with Rohan Tanna (applicant in MCRCA No. 353/2026) in connection with his business. He promised to assist him in his business. He provided him with the firm's GST ID and password for further business operations, promising him a 0.5% commission. All business activities within his firm, including purchases and sales, filing GST returns, were handled by Rohan Tanna, and he possessed all the documents. He is completely unaware of any fraudulent activities within his firm, particularly those related to the fraudulent ITC passing of Rs.10.22 crore. During the investigation, Chandan Gupta's involvement in the fake billing issue of the said firm was also revealed. On taking Chandan Gupta's statement, he had provided fake bills issued by M/s Shrishti Construction to various persons and he had obtained them from a person named Chandrashekhar Chandrakar (the applicant in MCRCA No. 368/2026) and the fake bills received from Chandrashekhar Chandrakar were issued by Rohan Tanna. During the investigation, on 28.07.2025, when Chandrashekhar Chandrakar's statement was recorded, he confirmed the statement given by Chandan Gupta and said that he had obtained the fake bills of M/s Shrishti Construction from Rohan Tanna and had provided them to Chandan Gupta. Chandrashekhar Chandrakar presented WhatsApp chats between him and Rohan Tanna. During the investigation, Premdas Panika's statement was recorded again on 11.08.2025. He stated that he became suspicious of a large transaction and refused to work with Rohan Tanna. Rohan Tanna threatened him severely. Karan Kumar Raiththa stated in his statement that on Rohan Tanna's instructions, he filed GST returns for M/s Shristi Construction. He was given the firm's e-way bill ID and password and issued e-way bills for the firm as directed. Upon examining the statement of Account No. 20100025960689 maintained in the name of the said entity with Bandhan Bank, Raipur, it was found that an amount of Rs.17.96 crore had been credited and an equal amount had been debited. This makes it clear that Rohan Tanna is one of the key individuals in this entire fraudulent ITC case.

3. Mr. Harshwardh