Jagdish Kanani Versus Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Indore
GST
2019 (3) TMI 485 – MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT – 2019 (23) G. S. T. L. 460 (M. P.)
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 26-2-2019
M. Cr. C. No. 3472/2019
GST
Vivek Rusia J.
For the Petitioner : Shri Vivek Dalal, learned counsel
For the Respondent : Shri Prasanna Prasad, learned counsel
ORDER
This is a first application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. by petitioner- Jagdish Kanani, who has been arrested by the respondent on 31.5.2018 during investigation in Cr. Case registered as Crime No.43/2018 by Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Indore for the offence punishable under Section 132 (1) (a), (b) and (c) of Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter, for short, “GST Act”).
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
3. As per prosecution/respondent story, Commissioner and Additional Commissioner noticed huge tax evasion and fraud in respect of payment of GST in t
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ms received fake invoices of Rs. 9,217.14 Lakhs for inward supply and issued fake invoices of Rs. 9,799.09 Lakhs for outward supplies. Accordingly, Jagdish Kanani and his partner defrauded Govt. Exchequer and evaded the GST to the tune of Rs. 3,422.02 Lakhs i.e. @ 18% of total supply Rs. 19,016.23 Lakhs by creating such bogus firms. In the course of investigation, the petitioner Jagdish Kanani appeared at CGST & Central Excise Head Quarter on 4.1.2019 and his statements were recorded u/s. 70 of the GST Act. He was confronted with evidence collected during the course of investigation. In his statement, he has disclosed all the information available with him and also admitted that he did not receive any goods physically nor he sold any goods and he did not submit any GST return. He is in contact with Mehul since 1994.
4. The petitioner was formally arrested on 5.1.2019 and produced before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class on 8.1.2019.
Thereafter, he applied for regular bail u/s. 439
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
n bail.
6. On the other hand, Shri Prasanna Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/prosecution, opposes the bail application. He has produced the statement of the petitioner and other witnesses. He submits that the statement recorded by the petitioner is admissible in evidence and which can be used against him in the trial as held by this Court in the case of M/s. R.S. Company V/s. Commissioner of Central Excise (CEA No.24/2012) decided on 8.2.2017. The main accused have not been arrested so far, hence the bail application be rejected.
7. U/s. 69 of the GST Act, the Commissioner is having power to arrest if he has reasons to believe that a person has committed an offence specified in Clause (a) or (b) or (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 132 of the GST Act. Section 132(1) (a), (b) and (c) of GST Act define types of offences and according to which, whoever commits offence of supply of any goods or services without issue of any invoice or issues any invoice or bill withou
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =