peeyush: Kanpur: Bail plea of perfume trader Peeyush Jain turned down | Kanpur News


KANPUR: District judge Mayank Kumar Jain on Thursday rejected the bail application of perfume trader Peeyush Kumar Jain, who has been charged by Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI), Ahmedabad under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act.
The presiding judge in his order observed that accused applicant Peeyush Kumar Jain is partner in M/s Odochem Industries and playing active role in two other firms, M/s Odosynth Inc and M/s Flora Naturale. Peeyush had admitted that was handling all sale, purchase and other business activities of all three firms.
DGGI Ahmedabad unit had raided his Anand Puri residential house and seized huge cash. The team raided Kannauj premises of M/s Odochem Industries and seized a good amount of cash. He had failed to express any acceptable explanation regarding the huge amount which was recovered from his residential and business premises. It was also notable that the accused had neither denied the ownership of the premises where search was conducted nor the possession of the huge amount of cash seized by the department.
“In my view the offence is of serious nature and is under the category of economic offence, which very adversely affects the economy of the county. The seizure of the huge amount and the articles indicates the malpractice applied by the accused and other persons against the public policy which endangers the ongoing economic reforms of the country,” the judicial officer observed.
The prosecution agency has already filed the chargesheet against Peeyush. Considering all facts and circumstances of the case and seeing the gravity of the offence, without making any comment on the merits of the case, the judicial officer did not find it a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application was liable to be rejected.
DGGI Ahmedabad unit on Thursday sent a special counsel, Digvijay Nath Dubey, for the help of special prosecutor Ambarish Tandon. Opposing the bail, they argued that the accused applicant had admitted that the huge amount recovered from his premises belonged to him. He had failed to explain against which invoices or vouchers he had received such a huge amount. Virtually, this amount includes the amount of evasion of tax.
Citing a Supreme Court order, they argued that the Apex Court had observed, “The economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. Economic offences having deep-rooted conspiracies and involving a huge loss of public funds needs to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting the economy of the country as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to the financial health of the country.”
Further, in view of the gravity of the offence and the nature of the economic offence and witnessing huge cash amounts and other articles which were unaccounted for, the applicant was not entitled for bail and his bail application was liable to be rejected.
They also countered the claim of the defence counsel that the accused was willing to pay CGST and fine thereon to the tune of Rs 52 crore, therefore, the bail should be granted to him. Dubey said that calculation was going on. That was a gross loss of revenue to the state. He had admitted that the money was of tax evasion.
If the accused had earned the seized sum by selling perfume, then imagine the quantity of goods he had sold. Therefore, he was not liable to get bail, they pleaded.





Source link

Leave a Reply