Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Sandeep Kumar Vs Nani Resorts and Floriculture Pvt. Ltd. (NAA)
Appeal Number : Case No. 56/2020
Date of Judgement/Order : 27/08/2020
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Sandeep Kumar Vs Nani Resorts and Floriculture Pvt. Ltd. (NAA)

Penalty should not be imposed for violation of the provisions of Section 171(1) during the period from 01.07.2017 to 30.09.2018 as the provisions of Section 171(3A) have come into force from 01.01.2020 and they cannot have retrospective operation.

FULL TEXT OF ORDER OF NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING APPELLATE AUTHORITY

1. The brief facts of the present case are that the Applicant No. 8 (here­in-after referred to as the DGAP) vide his Report dated 22.04 2019, furnished to this Authority under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017, had submitted that he had conducted an investigation on the complaints of the Applicant Nos. 1 to 7 and found that the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of input tax credit (ITC) in respect of the flats purchased by them in the project “ROF Aalayas” in Sector-102, Gurgaon, Haryana of the Respondent on introduction of the GST w.e f 01 07 2017, as per the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017. Vide his above Report the DGAP had also submitted that the Respondent had denied the benefit of ITC to the above Applicants and other buyers amounting to Rs. 2.47.48,549/- pertaining to the period from 01.07.2017 to 30.09.2018 and had thus indulged in profiteering and violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the above Act.

2. This Authority after careful consideration of the Report dated 22.04.2019 had issued notice dated 26.04.2019 to the Respondent to show cause why the Report furnished by the DGAP should not be accepted and his liability for violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1) should not be fixed. After hearing the concerned parties at length this Authority vide its Order No. 52/2019 dated 21.10.2019 had determined the profiteered amount as Rs. 2,47,48,549/- as per the provisions of Section 171 (2) of the above Act read with Rule 133 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017 pertaining to the period from 01.07.2017 to 30.09.2018 and also held the Respondent in violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1).

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031