The Gurugram Court has granted bail in Rs. 7.13 crore Input Tax Credit (ITC) fraud case.
A bench of Amit Gautam (Addl.Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurugram) has observed that ITC amount of Rs.7,13,27,948/- is involved and accused have been stated to be beneficiary of 25% and 7% of the alleged amount.
The accused argued that accused persons that arrest of both the accused is illegal as there are proceedural lapse with regard to the arrest in this case.
It was further contended that no ground of arrest were informed by the prosecution to the accused in a proper manner. Arrest memo is defective due to proceedural lapses as relative or friend of the accused was not informed about the arrest of the accused rather one unknown person has been cited as a witness on arrest memo who is not related to the accused.
It was argued that the statement of both the accused was recorded by the complainant department on 25.02.2025 and both the accused appeared before the complainant department on the aforesaid date on receiving notices and thus, they have co-operated with the complainant department in the matter of investigation.
It is further argued that firm M/s Kanvas has no concern with accused Virender Gupta. Accused Virender Gupta, is proprietor of M/s Cosmos International, which is situated wthin the jurisdiction of Delhi and complainant has no jurisdiction to conduct investigation with regard to the aforesaid firm which is situated beyond the territorial jurisdiction of Gurugram.
The petitioner contended that amount of Input Tax Credit (ITC) s Rs.7,13,27,948/- and as per Section 132 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, the amount of ITC involved in a case upto Rs.5 crore is a bailable offence. It is argued that allegation against the accused Virender gupta is that he is the beneficiary of 25% of the alleged amount and accused Rahul Dhingra received received 7% commission which is less than the limit of Rs.5 crore and aforesaid allegations of beneficiary of 25% of the amount and 7% commission against both the accused are baseless because there is no concrete evidence with regard to the availing of amount of ITC.
The Investigating Agency has relied only on the incriminating statement recorded by the complainant department under coercion and same cannot be relied upon.
The department contended that no physical goods were ever supplied or received by these firms and only invoices were prepared without actual supply of goods with intention of availing of fraudulent ITC and passing of fraudulently obtained ITC to various non-existent firms. It is further argued that arrest of accused is quite legal and all the legal formalities were complied with while arresting the accused.
The department argued that the accused have caused loss to Government Exchequer and it is an economic offence and accused were arrested with great difficulty and there is flight risk of accused. The medical ground as alleged in the bail applications cannot be taken into consideration to release the accused persons on bail. It is further argued that investigation of this case is still pending.
The court while allowing the bail application held that oth the bail applications moved on behalf of applicants/accused persons namely Rahul Dhingra and Virender Gupta have been allowed and both the accused persons named above are admitted to regular bail on their furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like amount each.
Case Details
Case Title: State. Vs. Rahul Dhingra
Case No.: CNR No.HRGR030238872025
Date: March 21st, 2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Vineet Chaudhary, Sandeep Chilana
Counsel For Respondent: Satish Aggarwal, Sr. Standing Counsel
Read More: Supreme Court Dismisses Plea for FIR Against Justice Yashwant Varma, Citing Ongoing Inquiry
