Thursday, May 9, 2024
₹0.00

No products in the cart.

HomeJudgementOffences and PenaltiesDenial of Bail in offences of Severe Nature.

Denial of Bail in offences of Severe Nature.

Date:

Related stories

Association of Inner Wheel Clubs of India, In re [11/WBAAAR/2018]

Ruling by: Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, West Bengal Facts The...

GST on Membership Subscription

Rotary Club of Mumbai Queens Necklace, In re Ruling...

GST on Refundable interest free deposit

Rajkot Nagarik Sahakari Bank Ltd, In re Ruling by:...

GST on interest subvention scheme

Daimler Financial Services India (P.) Ltd, In re Ruling...

Case Details:

Particular Details
Case No. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 18243 of 2021
Case Name Vinaykant Ameta v. Union of India
Court Rajasthan High Court
Date of Judgement 07-12-2021
Citation GIG-CLS-0089

 

Issue- In the above case, the petitioner has applied for bail under section 439 Cr.P.C. arising out of file No. DGGI/INV/GST/2916/2021-Gr-K-O/o DD-DGGI/RU-Udaipur, relating to offence punishable under sections 132 (1)(a), (f), (h), (j), (1) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 alleging tax evasion of Rs. 869 Crores.

Held- It was held that M/s Miraj Products Private Limited in which petitioner is the director of the company had evaded the tax. GST department had seized the one truck which was being unloaded at their premises. Department had collected data till today, tax evasion of Rs. 869 Crore. As per version of learned counsel for the petitioner, they had deposited Rs. 60 Crore as a protest. In my opinion, if they had not evaded the tax, then there would have been no occasion to deposit of Rs. 60 Crore as a protest. Apex Court in various pronouncement held that the economic offender should not be dealt as general offender because economic offenders run parallel economy and they are serious threat to the national economy. So, after considering the submission put-forth by learned counsel for the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the present case and also looking to the seriousness of the offence(s) alleged against the petitioner without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I do not consider it a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on bail under section 439 Cr.P.C.

Subscribe

- Never miss a story with notifications

- Gain full access to our premium content

- Browse free from up to 5 devices at once

Latest stories