Jai Prakash Garg Vs Adarsh thought Works Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) Based on the above facts The amount of benefit of ITC which was required to be passed on by the Respondent or the profiteered amount is determined as Rs. 1,70,28,230/- including the GST @12% on the basic profiteered amount of Rs. 1,52.03,777/- as has been […]
DGAP investigated the issues of whether the GST rate applicable to the item Shoe Polish was reduced e.f. 15.11.2017 and if so, whether the benefit of such reduction in the rate of tax had been passed on by the Respondent No. 1 to his customers in terms of Section 171 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
Sh. Shivam Agarwal Vs Gaursons Realtech Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) Keeping in view the self-admission of the Respondent in which he has stated that he is liable to pass on the benefit of additional ITC as per the provisions of Section 171 of the above Act, the above projects are required to be investigated as there […]
Principal Commissioner Vs Prasad Media Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) NAA held that Prasad Media Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (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 […]
Director General of Anti-Profiteering Vs M/s Neeva Foods Pvt, Ltd. (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) 1. The present Report dated 27.12.2019 has been furnished by the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP), under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017, The briefzs facts of the case are that a reference was received […]
Smt. Honey Macker Vs M/s Pivotal Infrastructure Pvt Ltd. (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) Applicants, the Respondent and the other material placed on record and find that the Applicant No. 1 vide her complaint dated 03.08.2018 had alleged that the Respondent was not passing on the benefit of ITC to her in spite of the fact that […]
Shri M. Srinivas Vs Vijetha Supermarkets Pvt. Ltd. (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) The Applicant had alleged that the Respondent had not reduced the selling price of the “Frozen Green Peas”, when the GST rate was reduced from 5 % to Nil w.e.f. 01.01.2019 with denial of Input Tax Credit, vide Notification No. 25/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated […]
Rahul Sharma Vs Mataji Paints and Hardware (NAA) Facts of the Case: The brief facts of the case are that an undated application was filed before the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering, under Rule 128 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017 by the Applicant No. 1 alleging profiteering by the Respondent. The […]
Sh. Puneet Bansal Vs Emaar MGF Land Ltd. (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) It is established from the perusal of the above facts that the Respondent has benefited from the additional ITC to the extent of 8.73% of the turnover during the period from July, 2017 to March, 2019 and hence the provisions of Section 171 of […]
Shri Kamal Nayan Singhania Vs Elegant Properties (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) In this case Respondent has profiteered by an amount of Rs. 1,42,369/- during the period of investigation. Therefore, this Authority under Rule 133 (3) (a) of the CGST Rules, 2017 orders that the Respondent shall reduce the prices to be realized from the buyers of […]
