Mehul Kheria Versus Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Indore
GST
2019 (3) TMI 486 – MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT – TMI
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 26-2-2019
M. Cr. C. No. 7932/2019
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- Mehul Kheria, who has been arrested by the respondent on 10.1.2019 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 the entire country. They apprised t
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ected him to obtain such type of GST Registration number and offered Rs. 1.00 Lakh for registration. As per his own admission, the petitioner has obtain registration certificate of as many as 59 fake firms. Present petitioner along with Jagdish Kanani created many bogus and fake firms and issued fake invoices to get the input tax-credit through these invoices and defrauded the Govt. Exchequer and as a result of the investigation till date it is found that in total, these firms 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, said 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
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
r under the GST Act. He has not rendered any services nor issued any invoice, therefore, he has wrongly been made accused u/s. 132 of the GST Act. His statement has already been recorded and his custody is not required for further investigation and he will cooperate in further investigation, if any, and is ready to appear before the respondent/prosecution as and when his presence is required. The investigation may take long time to conclude, hence he deserves to be released on 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, hen
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =