Input Tax Credit & dummy and sham firms – fake and fabricated invoices without supply of any physical goods
Input Tax Credit & dummy and sham firms – fake and fabricated invoices without supply of any physical goods
ORISSA HIGH COURT
RAJEEV MISHRA VERSUS STATE OF ODISHA AND ANOTHER
BLAPL No.958 of 2021
In above case the issue was regarding the ITC claim on goods which was considered as fake boll as ko supply of goods occurred.
As the law stands, in such type of offences, while granting bail, the Court has to keep in mind, inter alia, the larger interest of the public and State.
The court observed that petitioner is hand in gloves with the other accused in creation and operation of the non-existent business entities for availing and passing of bogus ITC thereby defrauding the state exchequer
With above, bail application dismissed by HC
Court has held as under:
The accusations against the petitioner relate to the commission of economic offences which are considered grave and therefore must be viewed seriously. Offences of this nature affect the economy of the country as a whole and usually involve a deep-rooted conspiracy to cause huge loss of public funds wherein the individual would rather achieve personal gains through illicit means than act in the best interest of the society.
Although this Court is cognizant of the fact that in some similar matters the accused persons have been admitted to bail, however, every case turns on the facts and circumstances of the case itself – In the instant case, the aspect of conspiracy seems to be forthcoming inasmuch as the co-accused persons have named each other an aspect which is of sanguine consequence.
As the law stands, in such type of offences, while granting bail, the Court has to keep in mind, inter alia, the larger interest of the public and State.
The exchange of incriminating documents relating to the non-existent firms between Smruti Ranjan Mohanty and the petitioner, the contrasting statement rendered by the petitioner and the deposition given by Smruti Ranjan Mohanty prima facie leads this Court to form an opinion that the petitioner is hand in gloves with the other accused in creation and operation of the non-existent business entities for availing and passing of bogus ITC thereby defrauding the state exchequer
The nature of supporting evidence, availability of prima facie case against the petitioner, coupled with the fact that a huge amount of public money has been misappropriated and also the fact that further investigation of the case is under progress and taking into account the apprehension of the petitioner in tampering with the evidence.
