The Tax Publishers 2025 TaxPub(GST) 737 (MP-HC)

CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017

Section 132

Where petitioner fabricated a large number of tax invoices and huge sum was adjusted in the sale by showing artificial sale, the case was triable under various sections of the IPC and not under the provisions of the CGST Act, the Court did not find any ground to interfere with the investigation, as the petitioner was not being prosecuted for any offence under the CGST Act.

Arrest - Grant of bail - Generation of fake and forged tax invoices without being published large number of advertisements in daily newspapers -

FIR was registered against petitioner on the ground of generation of fake and forged tax invoices without being published large number of advertisements in the daily newspapers and involvement of petitioner in money laundering by publishing the given newspaper. The petitioner sought quashment of the said FIR contending that when Crime was already registered under section 132(1)(a)(i) by the GST authority, then the second FIR was wrongly registered against him with intention to harm him because, for the same offence, registration of two FIRs is not permissible. Further, even till date in the first Crime, a charge sheet was not filed before the competent Court, therefore, registration of the FIR was nothing but a misuse of the process of law.Held: The petitioner was not being prosecuted for any offence under the CGST Act for which the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) was registered, and the investigation was ongoing on. The FIR was registered, as the petitioner fabricated a large number of tax invoices and the GST evasion of huge sum was said to have adjusted in the sale by showing artificial sale. The GST Authorities also found various fake invoices to transform black money into white, thus, the case was triable under various sections of the IPC and not under the provisions of the CGST Act. The Court did not find any ground to interfere with the investigation, which was going on against the petitioner. Therefore, the Court called the OIC to enquire as to why the investigation was not completed to date. Let the investigation be completed within two months and the final report be prepared positively.

REFERRED :

FAVOUR : Against petitioner

A.Y. :



IN THE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

VIVEK RUSIA & GAJENDRA SINGH JJ.

Kishore Wadhwani v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.

Writ Petition No. 40019 of 2024

13 March, 2025

Petitioner by: Abhinav Malhotra, learned counsel

Respondent No.1/State by: Amit Rawal, learned Government Advocate

Respondents No. 2 to 4 by: Prasanna Prasad, learned counsel

ORDER

Vivek Rusia J.

With the consent of the parties, finally heard.

The petitioner has filed the present petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking quashment of FIR No.88/2021 dated 10-2-2021 registered at Police Station Tukoganj, District Indore for the commission of offences punishable under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner is also challenging the constitutional validity of section 132(6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 (in short 'CGST Act'). Because of a challenge to the provision of the CGST Act, this writ petition is listed before the Division Bench.

SUBSCRIBE TaxPublishers.inSUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT