Meghraj Moolchand Burad Versus Directorate General of GST (Intelligence), Pune, The State of Maharashtra
GST
2019 (2) TMI 1150 – BOMBAY HIGH COURT – 2019 (21) G. S. T. L. 125 (Bom.)
BOMBAY HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 13-12-2018
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2333 OF 2018
GST
A.S. GADKARI, J.
\nMr. Ganesh Gole I\/b Ritesh Ratnam for applicant.
\nMr. Shyam Walve I\/b Ram Ochani for Respondent No.1.
\nMr. Ajay Patil, APP for State.
\nP.C.:
\n1] The applicant is apprehending arrest as he has received summons dated 5.10.2018 and 11.10.2018 from the Intelligence Officer, Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI), Zonal Unit, Pune under section 132 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
\n2] Heard the learned counsel for the applicant, the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 DGGI, Pune and the learned APP. Perused the record of investigation.
\n3] It is the prosecution case that, the applicant is the owner\/proprietor of the firm namely M\/s Shree Rajend<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n ious plea is recorded herein only for its rejection at the threshold as it is dehors of any merits. It is true that the said Act enacted by the Parliament is a new statute, but with an intention to establish easy process of revenue collection. However, some unscrupulous elements in the Society like the applicant by exploiting loopholes in the said Act are causing wrongful loss to the Government Exchequer and enriching themselves. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n ing Officer not to arrest applicant and the said fact is placed on record for information. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Meghraj Moolchand Burad Versus Directorate General of GST (Intelligence), Pune, The State of MaharashtraGST2019 (2) TMI 1150 – BOMBAY HIGH COURT – 2019 (21) G. S. T. L. 125 (Bom.)BOMBAY HIGH COURT – HCDated:- 13-12-2018ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2333 OF 2018 GSTA.S. GADKARI, J. Mr. Ganesh Gole I\/b Ritesh Ratnam for applicant. Mr. Shyam Walve … Continue reading “Meghraj Moolchand Burad Versus Directorate General of GST (Intelligence), Pune, The State of Maharashtra”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-16884","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16884","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=16884"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16884\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=16884"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=16884"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=16884"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\nThe custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary not only to unearth the entire truth behind the present crime, but also to investigate the modus operandi adopted by the applicant along with other accused persons who are involved in the crime and the same is not possible without there being through interrogation by the Investigating Agency.
\n6] The present matter has another facet. The present application was moved before the Vacation Court (Shri S.S. Shinde,J.) on 8.11.2018 when an oral statement was made by the learned counsel for the Investigating<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\nIt is astonishing to note that, the concerned Advocate on record “Mr.Ritesh Ratnam” has deliberately and with malfide intention not stated in the said letter that there is no interim relief granted in favour of the applicant. The Order dated 24.11.2018 clearly indicates that, the said Advocate Mr. Ritesh Ratnama himself appeared on 24.11.2018 before this Court and in his presence the said Order was passed including the sentence “no interim relief”.
\n8] It appears that, due to the said deliberate miscommunication by the applicant dated 26.11.2018, the Investigating Agency refrained itself from either arresting or interrogating the applicant. The deplorable practice adopted by the applicant and his Advocate is deprecated.
\n9] In view of the above and after taking into consideration the conduct of the applicant, gravity of offence and the serious allegation against the applicant, this Court is of t<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n