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 […]
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. […]
Shri Surya Prakash Loonkar Vs M/s Excel Rasayan Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) From the perusal of Section 122 (1) (i) of the CGST Act, 2017, it is clear that the violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1) is not covered under Section 122 (1) (i) of the CGST Act, 2017 as it does not provide […]
Director General of Anti-Profiteering Vs Raj & Company (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. 15.11.2017 […]
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 […]
Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering Vs Dev Snacks Cheriyela (NAA) Since, no penalty provisions were in existence between the period w.e.f. 27.11.2017 to 31.12.2017 when the Respondent had violated the provisions of Section 171 (1), the penalty prescribed under Section 171(3A) can not be imposed on the Respondent retrospectively. Accordingly, the notice dated 11.03.2019 […]
Rahul Sharma Vs Cloudtail India Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) Since, no penalty provisions were in existence between the period w.e.f. 15.11.2017 to 31.07.2018 when the Respondent had violated the provisions of Section 171 (1), the penalty prescribed under Section 171 (3A) can not be imposed on the Respondent retrospectively. Accordingly, the notice dated 11.03.2019 issued to […]
Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering Vs Win Win Appliances (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). 9. Since, no penalty provisions were in existence between […]
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 […]
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 […]
