NAA finds that DLF Limited has profiteered for the projects The Camellias, The Crest and The Ultima’ re during the period of investigation i.e. 01.07.2017 to 30.11.2020. The above amount that has been profiteered by the Respondent from his home buyers in all the above three projects shall be refunded by him, along with interest @18% thereon
Since the said Phase-I was not in existence in the GST period and the said Phase-III was yet to be started/registered as on 27.08.2020 hence, the Anti-Profiteering provisions under Section 171 of the CGST Act 2017 are not applicable on the said Phase-I and Phase-III of River View Heights of the Respondent.
Vishal Garg Vs JMD Limited (NAA) It is also evident from the above narration of facts that the Respondent has denied benefit of ITC to the buyers of the flats and the shops being constructed by him in his Project JMD Imperial Suits/Suburbio-67 (Suburbio-1)in contravention of the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST […]
Kalyan Chakravarthy Vs Prathima Multiplex Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) inds that the Respondent has resorted to profiteering by way of either increasing the base prices of the service while maintaining the same selling prices or by way of not reducing the selling prices of the service commensurately, despite a reduction in GST rate, on “Services by […]
Yogesh Sharma Vs Total Environment Habitat Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) The Authority finds that, the ITC, as a percentage of the turnover, that was available to the Respondent during the pre-GST period (April-2016 to June-2017) was 1.02%, whereas, during the post-GST period (July-2017 to April, 2020), it was 1.84%. This confirms that in the post-GST period, […]
Sh. Jayesh V Rathod Vs Savaliya Procon (NAA) Respondent has profiteered by an amount of Rs. 85,77,419/- during the period of investigation i.e. 01.07.2017 to 30.06.2020. The Authority determined amount of Rs. 85,77,419/- (including 12% GST) under section 133(1) that has been profiteered by the Respondent from his home buyers (as per the list mentioned […]
Sh. Rahul Sharma on behalf of Local Circles India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Mataji Paints and Hardware (NAA) Respondent has denied the benefit of tax reduction to the customers in contravention of the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 and he has thus committed an offence under Section 171 (3A) of the […]
NAA finds that benefit of additional ITC of 4.81% of turnover has accrued to Dreamhome Infrastructures for the project ‘Heritage Max’. Which was required to be passed on to recipients but not passed.
Respondent is engaged in selling of medicines from his retail stores. It is also revealed from the plain reading of Section 171 (1) supra that it deals with two situations one relating to the passing on the benefit of reduction in the rate of tax and the second about the passing on the benefit of the ITC.
There are no specific provisions in the CGST Act or rules, which provide for payment of determined profiteered amount in instalments.
