Rejected anticipatory bail application due to severity of allegations and the conduct of the assessee

In Directorate General of CGST Intelligence (Delhi East Unit) v. Saurav Gupta [Bail Application No. 1423/21 decided on July 28, 2021] Saurav Gupta ( …

In Directorate General of CGST Intelligence (Delhi East Unit) v. Saurav Gupta [Bail Application No. 1423/21 decided on July 28, 2021] Saurav Gupta (“the Respondent”), 90% shareholder of M/s Saurav Beverages Private Limited (“the Company”) filed anticipatory bail application.
The Department submitted that during the investigation, from the Respondent’s own statements it is revealed that accused company had issued invoices without actual supply of goods or services to pass on fake ITC of GST on bogus invoices to the fictitious, non- existent or non-functional firms/companies without actual movement of goods.
The Hon’ble Patiala House Court noted that the Respondent was in charge of the business affairs of the Company. Further, that the Company has allegedly carried out the business activities with the firms (27 alleged to be fake and fictitious) to the tune of crores of rupees.
Further, noted that as stated by the Respondent, he does not know the owner or the contact person or the contact numbers of the said companies with whom he had transacted or that he is not aware where they are located or that where the goods were supplied. Per-se indicates that the Respondent is trying to evade the purpose of investigation, and is misleading the further investigation of the case by deliberately and intentionally not coming clean on facts of the case.
Furthermore, the entire business appears to have been carried out merely on papers, without their being actual supply of the goods involving sum of Rs. 56 crore approximately. Thus, taking note of the nature of the offence, severity of the allegations an.d the conduct of the Respondent, rejected anticipatory bail.
DISCLAIMER: The views expressed are strictly of the author and A2Z Taxcorp LLP. The contents of this article are solely for informational purpose. It does not constitute professional advice or recommendation of firm. Neither the author nor firm and its affiliates accepts any liabilities for any loss or damage of any kind arising out of any information in this article nor for any actions taken in reliance thereon.
About Author

A2ZBimal Jain
Chartered Accountant
CA Bimal Jain is a Member of Institute of Chartered Accountants of India since May 1994 and Member of Institute of Company Secretaries of India since December 2006 along with a Bachelors degree in Law. Also, he is a Qualified SAP - FI/CO Consultant and has more than 21 years of experience in Indirect Taxation and specializes in all aspects of Service Tax, Value Added Tax (VAT)/ Central Sales Tax (CST), Central Excise, Customs, Foreign Trade Policy (FTP), Special Economic Zone (SEZ), Export Oriented Unit (EOU), Export-Import Laws and well acquainted with the concept and impact of way forward Goods and Services tax (GST).
A2Z Taxcorp LLP
Delhi, Delhi, India
468My Recent Articles
- Actions taken by the department during enquiry need not necessarily be termed as harassment
- Who are liable to generate e-invoice w.e.f October 1, 2022
- Personal penalty cannot be imposed on the Chairman of the Company for failure in ensuring proper accounting of the goods
- Stayed the order of cancellation of GST Registration of the assessee for continuing the trading activities
- Can CA be arrested- Section 69 vs Section 132 of the CGST Act
Up Next
Loading suggestions…









