HC rejected plea for anticipatory bail of applicant as custodial interrogation required to unearth offences

Case Details: Suresh Hukmat Rai Jadhwani v. Union of India - [2022] 142 taxmann.com 524 (Bombay)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• • N.J. Jamadar, J.
  • D.S. Joshi for the Applicant.
  • Jitendra Mishra, Ashutosh Misthra & Ms. P. N. Dabholkar for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The applicant received summons from the department and it was alleged that he was creating fake firms, issuing bogus invoices and availing ineligible ITC and passing same without supply of goods. It filed application for anticipatory bail and contended that it would be present before the authorities whenever called and co-operate during investigation.

High Court Held

The High Court observed that 21 fake entities have been identified during the investigation which were used to avail and further pass on ITC without the underlying transactions of sale and delivery of goods. The willingness of the applicant to cooperate with the investigation cannot serve the purpose of facilitating effective investigation and unearthing the fraud. Therefore, the Court noted that the allegations warrant custodial interrogation as fraud committed could not be brought on record without interrogation and the anticipatory bail application was rejected.