Patna High Court
For assessee
Case-law directory
Every ruling, in plain sight.
Search and filter tax rulings from the Supreme Court, the High Courts, the GST Appellate Tribunal and the advance-ruling authorities.
Case-law directory
Search and filter tax rulings from the Supreme Court, the High Courts, the GST Appellate Tribunal and the advance-ruling authorities.
25 rulings found
Patna High Court
Where petitioner was arrested for allegedly orchestrating issuance and availment of fraudulent ITC through fake tax invoices, considering that charge sheet had been filed and investigation stood completed, petitioner was enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond and two sureties of like amount to satisfaction of ACJM
Punjab & Haryana High Court
Where petitioners managing payout company and linked firm were accused in GST evasion network misreporting online money-gaming receipts through sham entities and dummy directors, with investigation completed, four months' custody, documentary evidence, and no risk of influence or tampering, further detention would have served no useful purpose and regular bail was to be granted subject to conditions
Punjab & Haryana High Court
Where petitioner was accused of availing wrongful ITC using fake invoices without goods movement, remained in custody for about four months, had clean antecedents, case material was documentary, there was no risk of flight or tampering with evidence, and trial was not nearing completion, continued detention was unwarranted and petitioner was entitled to bail subject to conditions
Karnataka High Court
Where petitioners running a firm for battery recycling faced allegations of fictitious suppliers, bogus ITC and supplier untraceability, since petitioners held valid GST registration, cancellation or closure of suppliers post-supply did not per se disentitle ITC absent proof of collusion, had cooperated and had no antecedents, custodial interrogation for compoundable offences with maximum five-year term was unwarranted; Anticipatory bail was to be granted subject to conditions
Allahabad High Court
Where GST demand and penalty proceedings for alleged fake ITC based on MIS Portal and e-way bill analysis were initiated and prosecution regime was available under GST law, parallel prosecution and cognizance under BNS for same facts could not continue, so charge sheet and cognizance order in BNS proceedings were quashed in view of primacy of special statute
Allahabad High Court
Where authorities alleged firm availed and passed on fake ITC through bogus invoices and initiated simultaneous GST demand and BNS prosecution based on same facts, since genesis was GST non-payment and BNSS mandates such offences be investigated under special enactments, prosecution under BNS for same conduct was barred and all parallel criminal proceedings under general law were quashed against applicant
Allahabad High Court
Where applicant accused of availing fraudulent input tax credit on invoices of non-existent firms was in custody after investigation completion, no evidence showed likelihood of tampering, intimidation or evasion, assessment was not initiated, maximum punishment was five years, and trial was unlikely soon, bail was justified considering presumption of innocence, speedy trial, and bail as rule
Chhattisgarh High Court
Where petitioner, a private businessman, filed PIL seeking directions for investigation and recovery in alleged tax evasion by specific parties based on supplied documents and previous dismissal for want of locus and same was to be dismissed as petitioner failed to disclose any element of genuine public interest; Security amount deposited by petitioner was to be forfeited
Allahabad High Court
Where competent authority had credible material and recorded adequate reasons showing necessity of arrest for proper investigation and preventing further offences or evidence tampering, arrest for ITC fraud was valid notwithstanding maximum punishment prescribed was up to five years. GST: Where grounds of arrest were duly served, competent authority recorded reasons to believe, and proceedings complied with departmental safeguards, arrest of petitioner was lawful; mere allegations of delayed supply, coercion or procedural irregularities did not warrant habeas corpus relief
Karnataka High Court
Where petitioners, scrap-trading firm proprietors, purchased goods from validly registered suppliers with payment through banking channels, held invoices, filed GST returns, and faced allegations of bogus invoices due to subsequent supplier cancellation, ITC could not be denied without proof of fraud or collusion, and anticipatory bail was justified as custodial interrogation was unwarranted given cooperation and no prior antecedents
Allahabad High Court
Where applicant was accused of operating multiple shell firms to pass fraudulent ITC with large financial magnitude and was in custody with no prior criminal antecedents, with no assessment proceedings pending and maximum sentence of five years, bail was granted citing fair procedure, presumption of innocence, and protracted trial likelihood
Punjab & Haryana High Court
Where complaint alleged wrongful availment of ITC M/s NIPL but did not arraign company as accused despite offences being attributed to company as registered person, prosecution of Director alone was not maintainable as company must first be arraigned for vicarious liability to arise, leading to quashing of complaint and all consequential proceedings
Punjab & Haryana High Court
Where petitioners accused of creating 26 fake firms and issuing bogus invoices causing fraudulent ITC benefit and substantial loss to revenue were in custody over seven months, with prosecution primarily based on documentary and electronic evidence and no risk of tampering or flight, coupled with no criminal antecedents, further incarceration was held unwarranted and regular bail was granted subject to conditions
Allahabad High Court
Where applicant, proprietor of areca nut trading firm, was prosecuted for alleged issuance of bogus retail invoices for B2B supplies and routing of cash via brokers, with no prior criminal history, undisclosed evasion amount, assessment pending, completed investigation, and no evidence of risk to justice, bail was justified as pre-conviction detention was not punitive and bail was rule
Rajasthan High Court
Where Additional Commissioner who approved prosecution report subsequently acted as quasi-judicial adjudicating authority in matter involving petitioner dealing in bullion, gems and jewellery, foundation of unbiased adjudication was undermined, giving rise to reasonable apprehension of bias and resulting in quashing of both adjudication and appellate orders with remand for separation of roles
Telangana High Court
Where designated partners of LLP were accused of availing fraudulent ITC with alleged fake suppliers and department sought arrest for custodial interrogation despite all documents being in custody of authority and no real risk of abscondence or tampering of evidences, since petitioner was cooperating, arrest was not warranted at this stage and anticipatory bail was to be granted subject to stringent conditions
Karnataka High Court
Where state GST initiated inquiry against a scrap trader for discrepancies and during pendency, central GST authority commenced a wider investigation and state inquiry was formally transferred, in view of fact that there was no identical liability or overlapping action and designated central authority was competent to proceed, parallel proceedings were not impermissible GST: Where petitioner challenged legality of arrest alleging non-furnishing of written grounds and lack of intimation to relatives, but records showed arrest memo was served with acknowledgment and intimation was given per Guidelines of GST Investigation Wing dated 13-01-2025, arrest action conformed to statutory parameters
Rajasthan High Court
Where petitioner arrested for running fake firms and facilitating GST evasion applied for successive bail on parity with co-accused who was granted bail, absence of substantial change in circumstances and distinct, graver role of petitioner compared to co-accused meant parity plea was insufficient, and second bail application was to be dismissed due to strict approach for economic offences
Rajasthan High Court
Where petitioner, a partner in firm alleged to have evaded GST by supplying goods without invoices worth Rs 53.16 crores, faced offences triable by Magistrate with maximum five-year punishment since investigation stood completed and custodial interrogation or recovery was no longer needed, bail was granted as trial would take time
Karnataka High Court
Where petitioners involved in alleged large-scale GST evasion sought anticipatory bail to approach judicial forum in another state, limited interim protection was to be granted for ten days subject to personal bond and sureties, passport surrender, and cooperation with investigation as there was no flight risk