Director-General of Anti-Profiteering Vs Urban Essence (Prop. Aniket Nagnath Nimbalkar) (NAA) We observe that as per the C.B.I.C. Press Release No. 62/2018, dated 18.10.2018, the last date to avail ITC in respect of invoices or debit notes relating to such invoices pertaining to the period from July 2017 to March 2018 was extended up to […]
Hemant Kejriwal Vs Siddha Infradev LLP (NAA) It is clear to us from the documents placed on record that the Respondent has claimed to have sold 70 flats after the introduction of GST and also claimed that he had freshly negotiated the prices of these flats after considering the benefit of the input tax credit. […]
Aruna Popat Vs Shalwak Infrabulls (NAA) We have carefully considered all the submissions filed by the Applicants, the Respondent, and the other material placed on record and find that the Applicant No. 1, vide her complaint, had alleged that the Respondent was not passing on the benefit of ITC to her on purchase of the […]
Sh. Sibi John Vs. Logix City Developers Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) 1. The present Report dated 27.03.2020 has been received from the Applicant No. 2 i.e. the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) on 13.05.2020 after detailed investigation under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the […]
Parveen Kumar Bansal Vs Sternal Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) We have carefully considered the Report furnished by the DGAP, the submissions made by the Respondent and the other material placed on record. On examining the various submissions, the observations of this Authority are as follows:- a) The DGAP, in Para 16 of his report, has […]
Prabhat Kumar Vs Mascot Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) NAA held that apparent anomalies in the Reports of the DGAP need to be appropriately addressed by way of revisiting the investigation in the interest of justice. Since there are differences in the figures considered for computation of the profiteering amount, thorough verification of the figures is […]
National Anti-profiteering Authority (NAA) directed the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) to investigate the profiteering charges against 14 projects of BPTP Ltd and furnish his Report under Rule 129 (6) of the CGST Rules, 2017. The investigation should be carried out w.e.f. July 1, 2017 to November 31, 2020 or till the date OC had been received by BPTP in respect of the Project.
Application filed by Applicant No. 1 alleging profiteering by the Respondent in respect of the supply of Services by way of admission to exhibition of cinematograph films where the price of admission ticket is above one hundred rupees despite a reduction in the rate of GST from 28% to 18% w.e.f. 01.01.2019.
M. Srinivas Vs Electronics Mart India Ltd. (NAA) The brief facts of the case are that an application dated 29.03.2019 was filed by the Applicant No. 1, under Rule 128 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017 before the Standing Committee on Anti-Profiteering alleging profiteering by the Respondent in respect of supply of Monitors and TVs […]
Director General of Anti-Profiteering Vs Procter & Gamble Home Products (PGHP) Private Limited (NAA) The brief facts of the case were that the Applicant had alleged that the Respondents had not passed on the benefit of reduction in the rate of GST from 28% to 18% w.e.f. 15.11.2017 to the recipients by way of commensurate […]
