A Kamrup court has remanded Trishna Barman to 14 days of judicial custody and rejected her bail plea in an alleged ₹25 crore fake GST ITC case involving bogus firms, fabricated invoices and suspected interstate links.

₹25 Crore Fake ITC Case: Trishna Barman Sent to 14-Day Judicial Custody

The420 Correspondent
5 Min Read

Guwahati: The Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) Court in Kamrup (Metro), Assam, has remanded Trishna Barman, the prime accused in the alleged ₹25 crore Input Tax Credit (ITC) fraud case, to 14 days of judicial custody. The court also rejected her bail application during Friday’s hearing. Barman, who was arrested in West Bengal and brought to Guwahati on transit remand, was produced before the court, which ordered her judicial custody. The Assam Goods and Services Tax (GST) Department is continuing its investigation into the alleged tax fraud and the wider network behind it.

According to investigating officials, Barman is likely to be questioned further as authorities work to determine the full extent of the alleged fraud and identify all individuals and entities involved. Investigators believe the case may involve several additional suspects and associated firms.

India’s Largest Cybercrime Conference Nears: FutureCrime Summit 2026 Set for 6–7 August at Bharat Mandapam

The investigation has so far revealed that Trishna Barman and her brother, Surajit Barman, allegedly established multiple bogus GST-registered companies. Investigators claim these entities were used to issue fake tax invoices without any actual supply of goods or services. The alleged fake invoices enabled businesses to claim fraudulent Input Tax Credit in exchange for commissions, resulting in substantial tax evasion.

The probe has also brought Shubhrajit Bhattacharya, a resident of Kolkata, under suspicion for his alleged involvement in the fake invoicing network. Officials are examining his financial transactions and possible links to the operation to determine whether he played a role in managing or expanding the alleged fraudulent network.

According to GST officials, the investigation has identified several fictitious or paper-only GST-registered firms that were allegedly created solely to facilitate fraudulent tax claims. Authorities allege that these shell entities issued fake invoices that enabled fraudulent ITC claims exceeding ₹25 crore, causing significant revenue losses to the Assam government.

Investigators also suspect that the alleged fraud was not confined to Assam. Preliminary findings indicate that the operation may have been part of a larger interstate network involving multiple individuals and companies registered in different states. In view of these findings, the scope of the investigation has been expanded to examine financial records, business transactions, and documentation linked to entities operating across state boundaries.

Officials said the current focus of the investigation is on tracing the money trail, identifying the real operators and beneficiaries of the fake companies, and uncovering the alleged commission network. Digital records, GST returns, banking transactions, and other financial documents are being analysed to establish how the fraudulent Input Tax Credit was generated and who ultimately benefited from it.

Tax experts have long warned that the misuse of fake GST registrations and fabricated invoices to claim fraudulent ITC remains a major challenge for tax authorities across India. In such schemes, shell companies often exist only on paper and are allegedly used to generate fake invoices without any genuine commercial transactions. These practices not only result in significant losses to government revenue but also create an uneven competitive environment for legitimate businesses.

The GST Department’s investigation remains ongoing. Authorities are working to determine the actual scale of the alleged scam, the number of fake firms involved, the beneficiaries of the fraudulent ITC claims, and whether the network extends further into other states. Officials have indicated that additional arrests and further legal action may follow as more evidence emerges during the course of the investigation.

About the author — Suvedita Nath is a science student with a growing interest in cybercrime and digital safety. She writes on online activity, cyber threats, and technology-driven risks. Her work focuses on clarity, accuracy, and public awareness.

Stay Connected