Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering Vs M/s Impact Clothing Co. (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) We have carefully considered the Report of the DGAP and the documents placed on record and find that the only issue that needs to be dwelled upon is as to whether there was a case of reduction in the rate of […]
State Level Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering Vs M/s Panasonic India Pvt. Ltd (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) It is apparent from the perusal of the facts of the case that there was no reduction in the rate of tax on the above product w.e.f. 01-07-2017 and that the rate of tax in the Post-GST era has also […]
The rate of tax applicable to the product had increased from 14.5% (12.5% Excise Duty + 2% CST) in pre-GST era to 28% in the post-GST regime. Consequently, the DGAP has stated that as there was no reduction in the rate of tax on the product in the post-GST era as compared to the pre-GST era, the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 were not contravened and hence the allegation of profiteering by the Respondent was not established.
Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering Vs M/s. Asian Granito India Ltd. (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) We have carefully examined the DGAP’s report and the documents placed on record to examine whether there was any reduction in the GST rate and whether the benefit of reduction in the rate of tax was passed on or not […]
NAA held that Respondent Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL) has resorted to profiteering being very well aware of the law and the rules which warranted him to pass on the benefit of GST rate reductions. Further he has also consciously and illegally recovered the excess realisation which was due to his RSs as ITC and thereby denied the benefit of tax reductions to the customers.
1) Being a part of the Ministry of Defence, Government of India, whether they are liable to pay GST Advance on the following supply of services: a) Liquidated damages deducted from the payments to be made to required suppliers in case of delayed delivery of goods or services. b) Amount of Security deposit forfeited of suppliers due to non fulfilment of certain contract conditions.
In re Premium Transmission Private Limited (GST AAR Maharashtra) From the harmonious reading of Section notes 4 and 5 to Section XVI and the inclusion Note in 8501 and the exclusion Note in heading 8483 referred to above, the ‘ geared motors’ being a combination of machines that is Electric Motors and Gear Box intended […]
In re Shrimad Rajchandra Adhyatmik Satsang Sadhana Kendra (GST AAAR Maharashtra) Appellant has contended that it is a public charitable trust with the main object of advancement of religious and spiritual teaching and is not engaged in any trade, commerce, manufacture, profession, vocation, wager or in other similar activities. Also, it is put forth by […]
Shanta Kapoor Vs ACIT (ITAT Agra) If AO omits to issue notice under section 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961 to all legal representative (LRs) of deceased assessee, the reassessment would be null and void. Assessee ‘deceased’ had 3 legal heirs, two being sons and one daughter. The AO had not issued notices to all the […]
In re M/s Shri Ashok Chaturvedi (GST AAR Chhattisgarh) Supply of specified printed Educational books by CHHATTISGARH TEXT BOOK CORPORATION as per the instructions of School Education Department CG [Loksikshan Sanchnalay] or as per instruction of various agencies of school Education Department CG such as Rajiv Gandhi Siksha Mission/SCERT/ office of District Education officer etc. […]
