HC grants anticipatory bail in fake GST invoice & ineligible ITC case

GST • News • Case Chronicles

anticipatory bail fake GST invoices ineligible ITC GST fraud HC ruling CGST Act Jharkhand GST Act
Case Details: Raaj Jaiswal Versus Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence (2025) 33 Centax 15 (Jhar.) 

Judiciary and Counsel Details

  • Ananda Sen, J.
  • Shri Nitin Kr. Pasari, Adv. for the Petitioner.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner, in a matter placed before the High Court, was alleged to have been involved in the creation of fictitious firms in the names of his employees for the purpose of issuing fake GST invoices and fraudulently passing ineligible input tax credit, thereby obtaining financial benefits and causing loss to the State. It was further alleged that these transactions were structured to evade tax liabilities under the CGST and Jharkhand GST Acts. During the entire period of investigation, the petitioner was neither taken into custody nor was any warrant of arrest sought by the investigating agency. The petitioner filed an application for anticipatory bail under section 484, read with section 482, of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. It was submitted that the petitioner had cooperated with the investigation and that one of the co-accused had already been granted regular bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of the High Court. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court. 

High Court Held

The High Court held that there was no requirement for custodial investigation, particularly in light of the fact that the petitioner had not been arrested throughout the investigation and no request for arrest had been made by the investigating agency. The Court found that there was no likelihood of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses. It also took note of the fact that a similarly placed co-accused had been granted regular bail, and that the petitioner’s case stood on similar footing. The Court observed that the conditions prescribed for grant of anticipatory bail were satisfied and that denial of bail in such circumstances would not serve the interest of justice. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail was allowed, subject to the petitioner furnishing a bail bond with two sureties. 

 

List Of Case Cited

Leave Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Stories
HC rejects bail cancellation plea in GST fake invoice case

GST • News • Case Chronicles

August 8, 2025

ITC Transfer Allowed in Interstate Amalgamation | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

August 8, 2025

No Writ Against ITC Demand Order; Appeal Remedy Available

GST • News • Case Chronicles

August 7, 2025

SC Dismisses SLP Against HC Order on Negative ITC Blocking

GST • News • Case Chronicles

August 6, 2025

Refund Allowed Under Inverted Duty Even Without Higher Input Tax | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

August 6, 2025

Street Light Maintenance for Local Bodies Exempt from GST: AAR

Centax • GST • News • Case Chronicles

August 2, 2025

No ITC on Pipelines Outside FSRU for LNG Re-Gasification | AAR

GST • News • Case Chronicles

July 26, 2025

HC Directs Timely Action on Pre-SCN to Enable GST Waiver Benefit

GST • News • Case Chronicles

July 26, 2025

HC Dismisses Petition to Recall Bail Due to No Flight Risk

GST • News • Case Chronicles

July 24, 2025

HC Issues Notice on Challenge to Section 168A Notifications | No Coercive Action

GST • News • Case Chronicles

July 23, 2025