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 da...

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 existenc...

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 exis...

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 ...

Santosh Kumari through Saurabh Prabhakar Vs Aster Infrahome Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) It is also 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 su...

Director General of Anti-Profiteering Vs Caroa Properties LLP (NAA) It is clear from a plain reading of Section 171(1) of the Act, ibid, that it deals with two situations, one relating to the passing on the benefit of reduction in the rate of tax and the second relating to the passing on of the benefit […]...

Mool Chand Mittal Vs Elan Ltd. (NAA) The brief facts of the case are that an application was filed under Rule 128 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 by the Applicant No. 1, alleging profiteering by the Respondent in respect of purchase of Shop No. GF-0131-A, in the Respondent’s project “Mercado” situated [...

Sudhir Kumar Jain Vs DLF Limited (NAA) The Applicant No. 1 has contended that the Respondent has wrongly charged GST @18% on the PLC on the sale of flat to him after issue of Completion Certificate. In this regard, it is pertinent to mention that as per the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST […]...

P. V. Narayanan Vs MRF Corp. Ltd. (NAA) The DGAP vide Para 15 of his Report dated 27.02.2020 has also stated that “as per the outward sales data submitted by the Noticee, it has been observed that approximately 90 products were not sold before 27.07.2018 and accordingly they are construed as new products launched by […]...

Rishabh Jain Vs Assotech Ltd. (NAA) NAA held that DGAP Report dated 29.06.2020 cannot be accepted and the DGAP is directed to further investigate the matter as per the provisions of Rule 133 (4) of the above Rules on the following issues and furnish his fresh Report in terms of Rule 129 (6):- (i) On […]...