Amit Kumar v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 31.03.2021 1.
CRM-M-37794-2020 Amit Kumar
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another .....Respondents 2.
CRM-M-37853-2020 Vishesh Kumar
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another .....Respondents 3.
CRM-M-41424-2020 Sahil Sharma @ Sahil Kumar
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another .....Respondents AND 4.
CRM-M-1155-2021 Abhishek Moudgil
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another .....Respondents
!
This order of mine shall dispose of the above-captioned petitions praying for the grant of regular bail in case bearing Complaint No.AC No.22 of 2020 dated 18.08.2020, registered under Sections 132(1) (b) (c) of the Punjab Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, Police Station Mandi Gobindgarh, pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Amloh.
As per the allegations contained in the aforesaid complaint, the petitioners had issued bogus bills showing false Input Tax Credit (ITC) (Payment of Tax to State Government) through bogus firms created by them. They have been accused of causing a loss of about Rs.8.73 crore and Rs.7.74 crore, respectively, to the Government by way of tax evasion, by creating a chain of firms and showing sales and purchase without there being any actual and physical transactions.
Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case inasmuch as there is no allegation of generation or originating of fake invoices i.e. invoices without payment of GST. Further, there is no evidence that the petitioners had facilitated any party to avail ITC without goods and the said party had ever utilized ITC for the payment of GST, which was payable on the actual supply of goods, and that there is no evidence against the
" petitioners with regard to the evasion of tax or loss of revenue. It was also contended that the matter is of civil nature and the liability is debatable. The maximum sentence under Section 132(1) (b) (c ) of the Punjab Goods and Service Act is an imprisonment which may extend upto five years. Moreover, the department had uploaded on its website that there was no liability of tax against the petitioners and even a zero liability had been shown towards them.
It was further contended that
# $% " & '( )* &+, -)).))
Tarun Bassi Vs. State of Punjab and others
! /
0 1 1
! '( )*
1 # ! 2 / )-/ 2 3 2 # It was also contended that the case is based on the documentary evidence and that no useful purpose would be served by keeping them in custody. He also relied upon the order dated 28.10.2020 passed by this Court in CRM-M-27425-2020, vide which similarly placed co-accused, Ganga Ram stands enlarged on bail. Further reliance was placed upon the orders dated 16.06.2020 passed by a Coordinate Bench in CRM-M-42451-2019, dated 18.06.2020 passed in CWP-8268-2020, titled as 'Rajiv Gupta Vs. Union of India and others', by a Division Bench of this Court and dated 15.03.2021 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this
. Court in CRM-M-3957-2021.
On the other hand, learned State counsel submitted that the petitioners had caused a huge loss to the Government by way of tax evasion and issuing bogus bills through their bogus firms. It was also stated that the aforesaid offence had been committed with cool calculation and deliberate design with an eye on personal profit regardless of the consequences to the community. It was also stated that the allegations # 2 2 # ! 2 /2!/!2 / / 1 - ) ) !2& &4 5)
647 8 !6 1 # # # !2 9 & : /
3
# $% "& '
!2 & & ! #
! # / 2
' !2 #
! ! / 2 # #
/ ;
'/
2 # ' ! 2 )) '
7 /
1 !
# #
/ 1
!!2
5 7 # ! ! '
! #
! (
3 < 2 ! /
# 4 ) 7 & <9
2 # '
! &
1
/ &
; 2! /
!
! ( / 31.03.2021
7 / + <7 #= ><, + !
= ><,