ICICI

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Lupita Saluja Vs DGGI (Delhi High Court)

LinkedIn


Court :
Delhi High Court

Brief :
Present petition has been filed under section 438 Cr.P.C. seekinganticipatory bail to the petitioner in relation to the enquiry/investigation being conducted by the respondent under Central Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017.

Citation :
Appeal Number : Bail Appln. 319/2021 & Crl.M.B. 92/2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Reserved on: 03.02.2021
Pronounced on: 11.02.2021

BAIL APPLN. 319/2021 & Crl.M.B. 92/2021
LUPITA SALUJA ..... Petitioner
Through Mr.N.Hariharan, Sr. Adv. with
Mr.Shadman Ahmed Siddiqui,
Mr.Sumer, Mr.Siddharth S. Yadav,
Mr.Samarth K. Luthra &
Mr.Abhishek Pati, Advs.
versus

DGGI AND ANR ..... Respondents
Through Mr.Harpreet Singh, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT

J U D G M E N T

1. Present petition has been filed under section 438 Cr.P.C. seekinganticipatory bail to the petitioner in relation to the enquiry/investigation being conducted by the respondent under Central Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017.

2. The case of the prosecution against the petitioner herein is that applicant and her husband created five bogus export firms, namely, M/sAtlantic International Trading Pvt. Ltd, M/s Blue Star International Pvt. Ltd, M/s Sun Flame Trading Pvt. Ltd., M/s Blue Evolution Pvt. Ltd and M/sWhite Mountain Trading Pvt. Ltd. and fraudulently availed ITC of Rs.45crores upon the strength of fake invoices providing fabricated informationon E-way bill portal. On enquiry, it is found that all their suppliers wereeither non-existent at the declared principal place or the business address given in the GST registration. Moreover, none of the transporters havetransported the good for the companies in question, however, only onetransporter disclosed that he transported the goods from a warehouse to ICDTKD and not from any of the suppliers as claimed by the husband of theapplicant in his statement dated 17.11.2020 recorded u/s 70 & 174 of CGSTAct. The applicant and her husband are active directors of theabovementioned five companies and were well aware of all the tax relateddealings of the companies. The applicant in her voluntary statement dated 10.12.2020 has stated that she signed all the financial documents regardingday to day work of these firms. However, during investigation, it has beenrevealed that applicant was drawing annual salary of Rs.7,20,000/- whereasher husband was drawing annual salary of Rs.6,00,000/-. The applicant hasreceived approximately Rs.279 crores from her companies accounts in herpersonal savings account maintained in Indusind Bank and Rs.5.79 crores in her bank account maintained in ICICI Bank.

To know more in details find the attachemnt file
 

 

Guest
on 24 February 2021
Published in LAW
Views : 98
downloaded 17 times
Report Abuse

LinkedIn







Trending Tags