Bishal Agarwal and Binod Kumar Agarwal and Uday Shankar Mahawar and Satyanarayan Sarawagi and Deepak Kumar V. Union of India through CBI

A.B.A./3366/2022

AI Insights

This case involves multiple anticipatory bail applications filed by Bishal Agarwal, Binod Kumar Agarwal, Uday Shankar Mahawar, Satyanarayan Sarawagi, and Deepak Kumar, all accused in a conspiracy related to the transfer of PANs and manipulation of tax assessments across different jurisdictions in India. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) alleged that the petitioners conspired to transfer PANs from Kolkata to Ranchi, Hazaribag, and Koderma to secure favorable tax assessments and evade taxes, leading to substantial losses for the government. The petitioners argued that they had no direct involvement in the alleged activities or that the actions taken were within legal bounds. However, the CBI presented evidence, including intercepted communications and previous chargesheets, indicating active participation and benefit from the conspiracy by the petitioners.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 698089 (HC-JHARKHAND)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 14-12-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Indian Penal Code, Prevention of Corruption Act, Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: ANIL KUMAR; CHANDANA KUMAR; PRASHANT PALLAV; SHIVANI JALUKA
• Assessee Lawyers: INDRAJIT SINHA; AMIT SINHA
• Keywords: Anticipatory bail; CBI investigation; Conspiracy; Economic offence; Illegal gratification; PAN transfer
• Section: 11; 12; 264; 13(2); 7; 8; 13(1)(d); 120-B; 120-B

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 3323 of 2022 Bishal Agarwal ..... … Petitioner with A.B.A. No. 3366 of 2022 Binod Kumar Agarwal ..... … Petitioner with A.B.A. No. 3392 of 2022 Uday Shankar Mahawar ..... … Petitioner with A.B.A. No. 3396 of 2022 Satyanarayan Sarawagi ..... … Petitioner with A.B.A. No. 3465 of 2022 Deepak Kumar ..... … Petitioner Versus Union of India through CBI ..... … Opposite Parties [in all cases] -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate. : Mr. Amit Sinha, Advocate. For the CBI : Mr. Anil Kumar, A.S.G.I. : Ms Chandana Kumar, AC to ASGI : Mr. Prashant Pallav, D.S.G.I. : Ms Shivani Jaluka, AC to DSGI ------ 10/ 14.12.2022 All these anticipatory bail applications arise out of RC AC1 2018 A 0007, that’s why with the consent of the parties, all these petitions are heard together. 2. Heard Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Anil Kumar, learned A.S.G.I. and Mr. Prashant Pallav, learned D.S.G.I. appearing for the CBI in respective cases. 3. In all these anticipatory bail applications, the aforementioned petitioners are apprehending their arrest, in connection with RC AC1 2018 A 0007, registered for the offences punishable under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 7, 8, 11, 12 and 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, pending in the court of learned AJC-XVIII-cum-Special Judge, CBI, Ranchi. 4. Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in all these cases submits that these cases are arising out of CBI investigation with regard to transfer of cases from CIT appeal to revisional authority at Ranchi, Hazaribag and Koderma and the allegations are that due to conspiracy of all these petitioners, the Government has occurred huge loss and the modus operandi was to get favourable orders by way of -2- transferring the PAN from Kolkata to Ranchi, Hazaribag and Koderma. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the allegation so far as petitioner Bishal Agarwal is concerned, he is a Chartered Accountant and consultant that’s why he has prepared petition under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act and he has only represented the companies and he is not the Director of the Company and he has got no role to transfer the PAN from Kolkata to Ranchi, Hazaribag and Koderma. 6. Learned counsel further submits that so far as petitioner Binod Kumar Agarwal is concerned, it has been alleged that he is the controller of certain companies and the revisional order has not been challenged by the Income Tax Department and one ITO has been granted anticipatory bail in connection with case. 7. Learned counsel further submits that so far as petitioner Uday Shankar Mahawar is concerned, the allegations are made that he is a controller of certain companies. He also submits that although, this petitioner was also named in RC AC1 2018 A 0003, however, he has not been chargesheeted in that case. 8. Learned counsel further submits that so far as petitioner Satyanarayan Sarawagi is concerned, it has been alleged that he is a controller of the company and loss to the tune of Rs. 80,72,710/- has been occurred to the Government. He submits that the revisional order, by which, the petitions have been allowed were not challenged by the Income Tax Department and one of the ITO has been granted anticipatory bail in connection with this case. 9. Learned counsel further submits that so far as petitioner Deepak Kumar is concerned, it has been alleged that he is also the controller of certain companies and huge loss has occurred to the Government. He submits that the revisional order, by which, the petitions have been allowed were not challenged by the Income Tax Department and one of the ITO has been granted anticipatory bail in connection with this case. 10. On the aforementioned grounds, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that all the petitioners may kindly be provided the privilege of anticipatory bail. 11. On the other hand, Mr. Anil Kumar, learned A.S.G.I., appearing for the CBI in A.B.A. Nos. 3366 and 3465 of 2022 submits that the petitioner Binod Kumar Agarwal has made his son Bishal Agarwal as authorized representative for most of the above mentioned Assessee -3- companies with the active involvement, he himself along with the controller of the Assessee companies were able to evade taxes and had obtained wrongful gain. He further submits that as per the intercepted calls between the petitioner and Bishwanath Agarwal, it is evident that he was part of the conspiracy. He further submits that as per directions of this petitioner, his clients took the decision to shown migrate the PAN of the company from Kolkata to Ranchi, Hazaribag and Koderma. He further submits that the petitioner was running M/s Pawanputra Investment Advisory Pvt. Ltd, M/s Punctual Computer Supplier Pvt. Ltd and M/s Shivdarshan Trade Link Pvt. Ltd. with the help of dummy directors. He further submits that the petitioner Binod Kumar Agarwal had also arranged fake addresses for migration of PAN of the above companies from Kolkata to Ranchi, Hazaribag and Koderma. He also submits that being controller / director of the three companies, the petitioner was beneficiary as well. 12. Learned A.S.G.I. appearing for the CBI so far as the petitioner Deepak Kumar is concerned, he submits that Assessee company M/s Viewmore Merchandise Pvt. Ltd and M/s Goodshine Vincom Pvt. Ltd. were controlled by him. He submits that with the help of Binod Kumar Agarwal, he arranged the fake addresses so that the business operation and place of keeping their books of accounts can be shown to have been shifted to the addresses of Ranchi. He further submits that in furtherance of said criminal conspiracy, the said companies were shown migrated from Kolkata to Ranchi. He further submits that the petitioner Deepak Kumar was running the aforesaid two companies with the help of dummy directors. 13. On the above submissions, he submits that the conspiracy part is there, and on these grounds the petitioners are not entitled for the privilege of anticipatory bail. 14. Mr. Prashant Pallav, learned D.S.G.I. appearing for the CBI in A.B.A. Nos. 3323, 3392 and 3396 of 2022 submits that so far as petitioner Bishal Agarwal is concerned, in para-16.21 of the chargesheet, it has come that he is a Chartered Accountant and played active role in the conspiracy. He has prepared petitions under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, in respect of most of the assessee companies and filed the same at Income Tax Department, Ranchi. He further submits that he has also appeared as authorized representative on behalf of the companies before the Principal Commissioner, Income Tax, Ranchi and Hazaribag. He further submits -4- that he has played a role of bridge between the accused public servants and accused controller of the companies for arranging illegal gratification for public servants. He further submits that he has also influenced public servants for favourable orders for the assessee companies in lieu of illegal gratification. 15. Learned D.S.G.I. further submits that the petitioner Uday Shankar Mahawar is concerned, it has come that M/s Trendon Distributors Pvt. Ltd and M/s Omatic Vyapar Pvt. Ltd. were controlled by the petitioner. He submits that this petitioner also arranged fake addresses to do the business operation and place of keeping their books of accounts can be shown to have been shifted to these addresses of Ranchi. He further submits that in furtherance of said conspiracy the said companies were shown migrated from Kolkata to Ranchi. He further submits that due to said conspiracy the Government has occurred a loss to the tune of Rs. 33866420 and Rs. 5962550 respectively. He further submits that these dummy Directors are merely the front face of the companies and only signing the letters / documents on the direction of the actual controller. He Further submits that CIT appeals were pending at Kolkata, in spite of that, revision petitions have been filed. 16. Learned D.S.G.I. further submits that so far as Satyanarayan Sarawagi is concerned, it has come that he is the director of M/s Parshwa Chemical Pvt. Ltd. He further submits that this petitioner along with accused Bishal Agarwal arranged fake addresses so that the business operation and place of keeping their books of accounts can be shown to have been shifted to these addresses of Ranchi. He submits that the controller / promoters of the beneficiary companies directly / indirectly contacted Sri Tapas Kumar Dutta, the then PCIT, Ranchi / Hazaribag and conspired to get the PAN transferred to Ranchi / Hazaribag so that, revision proceedings under Section 264 may be initiated by Sri Tapas Kumar Dutta in furtherance of the said conspiracy. 17. Learned A.S.G.I. and learned D.S.G.I., jointly submits that it has come that the CIT appeals were pending, in spite of that revision petitions have been filed to obtain the favourable orders. They also submit that the anticipatory bail of the other co-accused has been rejected in this case. On the aforementioned grounds, these petitioners are not entitled for anticipatory bail. 18. In view of the above, the court has gone through the materials available on record as well as rival submissions of the learned counsel -5- appearing for the parties and finds that it has been alleged that the petitioner Bishal Agarwal has prepared Section 264 petitions and represented the companies before the PCIT. The petitioners Satyanarayan Sarawagi and Uday Shankar Mahawar are concerned, they are the directors / controllers of the respective companies, as disclosed in the submission of learned D.S.G.I. appearing for the CBI and the huge loss has occurred to the Government. The petitioner Binod Kumar Agarwal is concerned, he has made his son Bishal Agarwal as authorized representative for most of the above mentioned Assessee companies with the active involvement, he himself along with the controller of the Assessee companies were able to evade taxes and had obtained wrongful gain and so far as petitioner Deepak Kumar is concerned, he was also the director / controller of the company mentioned in the submission of learned A.S.G.I. and huge loss has occurred to the Government due to his active conspiracy with the then PCIT. All the petitioners are in conspiracy of transferring the PAN to the PCIT, Ranchi, Hazaribag and Koderma. It has also come that during the pendency of the CIT appeals at Kolkata, such revision petitions have been filed to obtain favourable orders in connivance with Sri Tapas Kumar Dutta, the then PCIT. 19. Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the cases and considering that the economic offence is a serious offence against the society, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, these petitions are dismissed. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Amitesh/- "