Case Law Details
DG Anti Profiteering Vs Mussoorie Dehradun Development Authority (GSTAT)
The GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) heard the matter in hybrid mode in a case concerning alleged profiteering. The Directorate General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) was represented by an Assistant Commissioner along with an Additional Assistant Director, while the Respondent was represented by counsel appearing in person. The original complainant also appeared virtually before the Tribunal.
During the hearing, the Tribunal observed that there appeared to be a possible miscalculation in the profiteered amount determined by the DGAP. According to the DGAP’s computation in Table-A of Paragraph 18 of its report, the total Input Tax Credit (ITC) availed post-GST was considered as ₹21,46,41,680/-. However, the Respondent submitted that this figure related to all projects collectively and not the specific project involved in the proceedings. The Respondent stated that it was prepared to submit Chartered Accountant-certified documents showing that the actual post-GST credit for the present project was ₹15,32,70,003/-.
The Tribunal further noted that the DGAP was unable to satisfactorily explain how the post-GST credit ratio had been computed at 20.53%. The Bench observed that, in most cases, GST imposed after 01.07.2017 was generally 18%, with an abatement of around 6%, leading to effective ITC availment of approximately 12%. Although the DGAP stated that the calculations were based on documents submitted by the Respondent, the Tribunal expressed dissatisfaction with the explanation provided.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF GSTAT
The matter is taken up in hybrid mode.
Shri G. Srinivas Kumar, Assistant Commissioner, assisted by Shri Rahul Rao Gautam, AAD, appears on behalf of the DGAP.
Shri Abhinav Kalra, learned Advocate, appears in person for the Respondent. Shri Sarvagya Agrawal, the original complainant, appears virtually before us.
Further hearing was taken up. It has been brought to our notice that there appears to be a miscalculation in the profiteered amount. The DGAP, while calculating the profiteered amount, considered the total credit availed as per Table-A of Paragraph 18 of the Report to be Rs. 21,46,41,680/-. However, the learned Counsel for the Respondent submitted that this figure pertains to the entire projects, and that the Respondent is prepared to produce CA-certified documents to demonstrate that the total credit availed post-GST is Rs. 15,32,70,7,003/-. for the present project.
At this stage, the learned Assistant Commissioner appearing for the DGAP could not satisfactorily explain how the ratio of credit availed after the implementation of GST was computed as 20.53%. From our experience, in most cases, the total GST imposed after 01.07.2017 is 18%, with an abatement of about 6%, bringing the effective ITC availment to approximately 12%. The learned AAD made an effort to justify the calculations stating that it has been arrived at only on the basis of documents submitted by the Respondent, however, we are not satisfied with the explanation offered.
We also take note of the fact that during the course of the investigation, the Respondent was slow in cooperating with the investigating authority.
In view of the above, and in the interest of justice, we hereby direct the Respondent to produce all additional documents as deemed fit, to support their claim, to the DGAP, within four weeks. The DGAP shall examine the same in its proper perspective and take a perspicacious view on it and submit a supplimentary report, within three weeks i.e. by 27.06.2026
The Respondent shall thereafter examine the final conclusions of the DGAP and file its response within one week.
List the matter on 09.07.2026.
Author Bio
