No anticipatory bail to applicant who used proxies to obtain registration with fraudulent documents: HC

Case Details: Bal Mukund Vaishnav v. State of Maharashtra - [2023] 147 taxmann.com 309 (Bombay)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• • M.S. Karnik, J.
  • Brijesh Pathak for the Applicant.
  • S.V. Gavand & PI Preetam S.B. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The applicant filed an application for anticipatory bail before the High Court of Bombay. In the instant case, the GST department noticed something suspicious about the working of a company and conducted enquiry. During enquiry, it was found that the applicant was allegedly controlling whole affairs with two directors in front who are cylinder delivery boy and welder. The department filed FIR against the applicant for offences under Section 132 of GST Act, 2017.

High Court Held

The Honorable High Court noted that the allegation against the applicant was that it had produced fraudulent documents while obtaining the registration. Moreover, the owner of premises had given statement that he had never given the premises on lease and license or on rent and the NOC which was submitted did not bear his signature. The department also submitted that the applicant had not co-operated with the investigation. Therefore, the Court held that this was not a fit case to grant relief of pre-arrest bail to the applicant and anticipatory bail application was rejected.