Mukesh Kumar Vs Supertech Limited (NAA) It is observed that provision of the 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 […]
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 […]
Hussain Shoaib Kothalia Vs Subwest Restaurant LLP (NAA) The brief facts of the case are that an application was filed by the Applicant No. 1 with the Maharashtra State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering alleging profiteering in respect of restaurant service supplied by the Respondent despite the reduction in the rate of GST from 18% to […]
Gopinath Dombla Vs Navkar Associates (NAA) It is 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 (3A) was added in Section […]
Pradeep Kumar Vs Fusion Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) Respondent had not passed on the benefit of additional Input tax Credit (ITC) to the above Applicant No. 1 as well a other homebuyers who had purchased them in his Project “Fusion Homes” for the period from 01.07.2017 to 30.09.2018 and hence, the Respondent has violated the […]
Director-General of Anti-Profiteering Vs Hungry Eyes (NAA) An application alleging profiteering in respect of restaurant service supplied by the Respondent (Franchisee of M/s Subway Systems India Pvt. Ltd.) after a prima-facie examination by the Maharashtra State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering under Rule 128 (2) of the CGST Rules 2017. Vide the application, it has been […]
Jotbir Singh Bhalla Vs Suncity Projects Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) The brief facts of the case are that the DGAP had received a reference from the Standing Committee on Anti-Profiteering on 28.06.2019 to conduct a detailed investigation in respect of a complaint filed by Applicant No. 1 before the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering, stating therein that he […]
Devroop Guha Vs Signature Global (India) Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) Perusal of the record reveals that the Respondent had got Affordable Housing ‘The Millenia 37D’ project approved under the Haryana Affordable Housing Policy and allotted flats to the successful buyers on 27.10.2017 through draw of lots He invited applications for allotment of houses via advertisement in […]
Ravi Charaya Vs Hardcastle Restaurants Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) Respondent is liable to pass on the benefit of GST rate reduction from 18% to 5% with denial of benefit of ITC, as was notified by the Central and the State Governments vide Notification No. 41/2017-Central tax (Rate) dated 14.11.2017 w.e.f. 15.11.2017. It is also established that […]
Hussain Shoaib Kothalia Vs Dra Aadithya Projects Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) 1. The present Report dated 26.03.2020 has been received from the Applicant No. 3 i.e. the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after detailed investigation under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the case are […]
