Director-General of Anti-Profiteering Vs Dange Enterprises (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) We observe that as an investigating agency, the DGAP has been conferred with wide-ranging powers under Rules 129 and 132 of the CGST Rules read with Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 to summon any relevant record which may be required for conducting an investigation […]
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 […]
Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti Profiteering Vs TTK Prestige Ltd. (NAA) Since, no penalty provisions were in existence between the period w.e.f. 01.11.2017 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 […]
Kumudchandra Atmaram Patel Vs TTK Prestige Ltd. (NAA) 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 the period w.e.f. […]
Principal Commissioner Vs Sudharshan 35 MM (NAA) Applicant No. 1 had filed an application dated 06.03.2019 under Rule 128 of the CGST Rules, 2017 alleging profiteering by the Sudharshan 35 MM in respect of the supply of ‘Services by way of admission to exhibition of cinematograph films where price of admission ticket is one hundred […]
Sh. Rajender Meena Vs Logix Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) We take note of the fact that Respondent vide his submissions dated 05.06.2020 has accepted his liability of passing on the benefit of additional ITC as per the report of the DGAP and has also submitted that he had passed on the benefit of […]
Deepak Kumar Khurana Vs Sattva Developers Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) 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 the period w.e.f. 01.07.2017 to […]
Ajay Kumar Vs Pivotal Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) It is established from the perusal of the above facts that the Respondent has benefited from the additional ITC to the extent of 2.67% of the turnover during the period from July 2017 to December 2018 and hence the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, […]
Vivek Gupta Vs Gurukripa Developers & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) 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 […]
M. Srinivas Vs Infinity Retail Ltd. (NAA) The present Report dated 23.12.2019, has been furnished by the Applicant No. 2 i.e. the Director-General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP), under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the present case are that an application dated 29.03.2019 was filed […]
