Is Bail Granted to CA Accused of Making 13 Fictitious Firms and Passing on ITC of Rs 319 Crore

According to the allegation, the petitioner, a Chartered Accountant, was involved in the creation and operation of bogus business entities in order to facilitate the receipt of bogus ITC. According to the materials on file, the petitioner allegedly obtained GST registration in relation to the fictitious business concerns in collusion with other accused persons by utilising and forging the so-called proprietors’ personal identity documents.

The nature and extent of the petitioner’s involvement in the alleged transactions is clear and can be deduced from the materials on file. In terms of the offence under Section 132 of the OGST Act, it is in relation to GST fraud alleged to be worth Rs.319.64 crore, in which the petitioner is said to have been involved by forming and operating fictitious business entities in the names of people with no means. As a result, the business establishment for which he worked as a Chartered Accountant obtained bogus ITC under the guise of joint liability. Concerning the petitioner’s request for bail release, the relevant factors must be examined to determine what impact it would have on the investigation and trial process if granted.

The petitioner is a Chartered Accountant, and the alleged business concern used his services. Whether it is a case of the petitioner facilitating the bogus ITC being obtained is to be addressed and decided during and during the course of the trial. The GST authorities have discovered the alleged fraud being committed in order to obtain fake ITC by establishing bogus business entities, and it appears to be an act that holds all of the accused persons jointly and severally liable.

It prescribes a substantive sentence of five years in the maximum for the offence punishable under Section 132(1)(i) of the GST Act. Given the nature of the involvement and the specific role claimed, as a Chartered Accountant, and his period of detention of four months, as well as the fact that sufficient materials have already been collected, and as the prosecution now primarily relies on documentation and related evidence, tampering with the evidence appears to be remotely possible, the Court, being aware of the settled position of law applicable to the subject matter, is inclined

As a consequence, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,00.000/-(rupees fifty lac) with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court below in seisin over the matter with conditions, such as, he shall not induce, threat or terrorize any of the material witnesses, while on bail; shall not exercise any kind of influence or pressure vis-à-vis the prosecution witnesses to be examined during the trial and thus, not to tamper with the collected evidence, in any manner whatsoever; shall not involve or indulge in any such similar kinds of nefarious activities; shall surrender his passport, if he has any, before the learned court below and shall not leave the jurisdiction of the court without its prior permission.