Sponsored
    Follow Us:

No penalty for Violation of Section 171(1) occurred before 01.01.2020

December 11, 2020 597 Views 0 comment Print

Mohit Arora Vs Lodha Developers Ltd (NAA) Since no penalty provisions were in existence between the period w.e.f. 01.07.2017 to 31.08.2018 when the Respondent had violated the provisions of Section 171 (1), the penalty prescribed under Section 171 (3A) cannot be imposed on the Respondent retrospectively. Accordingly, the notice dated 18.12.2020 issued to the Respondent […]

Inox Leisure guilty of not passing benefit of reduction in GST rate: NAA

December 11, 2020 1251 Views 0 comment Print

Shri. I.P Saji Vs Inox Leisure Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) The brief facts of the case are that a reference was received from the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering from Applicant No. 1, alleging profiteering in respect of the supply of restaurant service despite a reduction in the rate of GST from 18% to 5% w.e.f. 15.11.2017. […]

Penalty for violation of Section 171(1) effective from 01.01.2020

December 11, 2020 516 Views 0 comment Print

Director General of Anti-Profiteering Vs Raj & Company (NAA) 1. The brief facts of the present case are that the DGAP vide his Report dated 08.08.2018, 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 and found that […]

No Section 171(3A) penalty on Lifestyle International (Between 15.11.2017 to 31.01.2018

December 11, 2020 540 Views 0 comment Print

Neeru Varshney Vs Lifestyle International Pvt. Ltd.(NAA) It is further revealed that vide Section 112 of the Finance Act, 2019 specific penalty provisions have been added for violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1) which have come in to force w.e.f. 01.01.2020, by inserting Section 171(3A). Since, no penalty provisions were in existence between […]

GST: Section 171(3A) Penalty provisions not in existence between 15.11.2017 to 31.01.2018

December 11, 2020 504 Views 0 comment Print

Pawan Sharma C/O Kalptaru Departmental & General Stores Vs Sharma Trading Company (NAA) Since, no penalty provisions were in existence between the period w.e.f. 15.11.2017 to 31.01.2018 when the Respondent had violated the provisions of Section 171 (1), the penalty prescribed under Section 171 (3A) cannot be imposed on the Respondent retrospectively. Accordingly, the notice […]

NAA withdraws Penalty Notice issued to Aster Infrahome

December 11, 2020 465 Views 0 comment Print

Santosh Kumari through Saurabh Prabhakar Vs Aster Infrahome Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) It is also revealed from the perusal of the CGST Act and the Rules framed under it that the Central Government vide Notification No. 01/2020-Central Tax dated 01.01.2020 has implemented the provisions of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019 from 01.01.2020 vide which sub-section 171 […]

Caroa Properties Not Guilty of Profiteering U/s. 171: NAA

December 11, 2020 726 Views 0 comment Print

Director General of Anti-Profiteering Vs Caroa Properties LLP (NAA) It is clear from a plain reading of Section 171(1) of the Act, ibid, that it deals with two situations, one relating to the passing on the benefit of reduction in the rate of tax and the second relating to the passing on of the benefit […]

Elan Ltd. Guilty of not passing ITC benefit in its Project ‘Mercado’

December 11, 2020 1659 Views 0 comment Print

Mool Chand Mittal Vs Elan Ltd. (NAA) The brief facts of the case are that an application was filed under Rule 128 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 by the Applicant No. 1, alleging profiteering by the Respondent in respect of purchase of Shop No. GF-0131-A, in the Respondent’s project “Mercado” situated […]

NAA directs DGAP to further investigate in case of ‘Lifeways Infrastate’

December 11, 2020 234 Views 0 comment Print

Ashok Kumar Singh Vs Lifeways Infrastate Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) RERA Act, 2016 makes it mandatory for a real estate developer/promoter to maintain separate bank accounts for each of his projects registered separately under the RERA Act, 2016. In the case of the Respondent, the above provision implies that he was required to maintain four separate […]

Interim custody of Vehicle seized for offence under NDPS Act can be granted

December 11, 2020 28761 Views 0 comment Print

Tikeshwar Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh (Chhattisgarh High Court) Vehicle seized for commission of offence under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985; interim custody can be granted under Section 451/457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT 1. This petition under Section […]

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