Anticipatory Bail denied for bailable offences as value of false ITC claimed being less than 5 crores

Last updated: 07 September 2021

Save Share

Quick Summary

The Gujarat High Court denied anticipatory bail to an applicant accused of availing false Input Tax Credit (ITC) amounting to less than 5 crores. The court ruled that since the alleged offence was bailable, there was no apprehension of arrest, making the application for anticipatory bail unsustainable. However, the court directed the authorities to provide 10 days' notice before any arrest if the falsely claimed ITC value later exceeds 5 crores, potentially making the offence non-bailable.

Court :
Sessions Court, Rajkot

Brief :
In Amit Haresh Kumar Mehta v. Senior Intelligence Officer, DGGI [Cr. M. A. No. 1486/2021 dated August 11, 2021], Amit Haresh Kumar Mehta ("the Applicant") has filed the current application seeking an Anticipatory Bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("the Cr.P.C").

Citation :
Cr. M. A. No. 1486/2021 dated August 11, 2021

In Amit Haresh Kumar Mehta v. Senior Intelligence Officer, DGGI [Cr. M. A. No. 1486/2021 dated August 11, 2021], Amit Haresh Kumar Mehta ("the Applicant") has filed the current application seeking an Anticipatory Bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("the Cr.P.C").

The Senior Intelligence Officer, DGGI ("the Respondent") has contended that according to the ongoing investigation, the Applicant has been accused to allegedly avail false Input Tax Credit ("ITC") amounting to less than Rupees Five Crores and offence alleged against the Petitioner being a bailable in nature, therefore, there lies no apprehension of arrest. Hence, the present application does not lie maintainable.

The Petitioner on the contrary relying on the case of Naresh Mevabhai Desai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax-1, Unit 21 [R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 3512 of 2021 dated June18, 2021] contends that the Respondent in its Affidavit has provided that the amount of ITC falsely claimed may increase since the investigation is underway, for this reason, some level of protection must be allowed.

The Hon’ble Sessions Court, Rajkot held in favour of the Respondent by observing that there lies no apprehension of arrest since the allegations levelled against the Applicant attracts offences which are bailable in nature, thereby dismissing the current application falling under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. Further, asked the Respondent to provide to the Applicant, a notice at least 10 days prior of making the arrest in case the value of false ITC exceeds beyond 5 Crores and attracts commission of offence non bailable in nature.

FAQ :

Anticipatory bail was denied because the alleged offence of availing false Input Tax Credit (ITC) amounting to less than 5 crores was considered bailable, meaning there was no immediate apprehension of arrest.

The applicant was accused of availing false ITC amounting to less than Rupees Five Crores.

The court ordered that the respondent must provide the applicant with at least 10 days' notice prior to making an arrest, should the value of the falsely claimed ITC exceed 5 Crores and attract non-bailable offences.

Generally, anticipatory bail is not maintainable for bailable offences as there is no apprehension of arrest. The applicant's case was dismissed on this ground.

The 5 crore threshold is significant as it distinguishes between bailable and potentially non-bailable offences. Claims below this value were treated as bailable, while exceeding it could lead to non-bailable charges and require notice before arrest.

176 Views Comment Share GST Report

Judgement posted by

Bimal Jain

Service

FCA, FCS LLB with21 Yrs of Experience inTaxation Indirect and Direct: Education Qualification: B.Com (Hons) Chartered Accountants Company Secretary LLB Qualified SAP FI/CO Consultants Professional Membership: Chairmanof Indirect Tax Committee of PHD Chamber of Commerce Member of Indirec ... Read more

View Judgements

Comments