Case Law Details
Saurabh Kumar Vs Pareena Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (NAA)
1. The present Report dated 25.03.2020 has been received from the Applicant No. 2 i.e. the Director-General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after a detailed investigation under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the case are that vide his application filed before the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering under Rule 128 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017, Applicant No. 1 had alleged profiteering by the Respondent in respect of the purchase of Flat in his “Laxmi Apartments” project located in Gurugram, Haryana. The above Applicant had also alleged that the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of Input Tax Credit (ITC) availed by him by way of commensurate reduction in the price of the above flat after implementation of GST w.e.f. 01.07.2017. The aforesaid application was considered by the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering, in its meeting held on 15.05.2019, wherein it was decided to forward the same to the DGAP to conduct a detailed investigation into the complaint according to Rule 129 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017.
2. On receipt of the recommendation from the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering, the DGAP had issued Notice dated 09.07.2019 under Rule 129 (3) of the above Rules, asking the Respondent to intimate as to whether he admitted that the benefit of ITC had not been passed on to the above Applicant by way of commensurate reduction in the price of the flat and in case it was so, to suo-moto compute the quantum of the same and mention it in his reply to the Notice along with the supporting documents. The Respondent was allowed to inspect the non-confidential evidence/information furnished by Applicant No. 1 during the period between 17.07.2019 to 19.07.2019 following Rule 129 (5) of the above Rules but the Respondent did not avail of the said opportunity. Vide e-mail dated 24.12.2019, Applicant No. 1 was also allowed to inspect the non-confidential documents/reply submitted by the Respondent on 26.12.2019. However, the Applicant did not avail of the said opportunity.
3. The DGAP has covered the period from 01.07.2017 to 30.06.2019 during the current investigation. The time limit to complete the investigation was extended up to 26.03.2020 by this Authority, vide letter dated 27.12.2019, in terms of Rule 129(6) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017.
4. The DGAP has further stated that the Respondent had ‘ubmitted replies vide his letters/emails dated 23.07.2019, 05.08.2019, 11.09.2019, 12.09.2019, 19.09.2019, 24.09.2019, 14.10.2019, 27.11.2019, 10.12.2019, 18.03.2020. The Respondent, vide his above-mentioned submissions, had furnished the following documents before the DGAP:
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
