Case Law Details
Mukesh Kumar Vs Supertech Limited (NAA)
It is observed that provision of the RERA Act, 2016 makes it mandatory for a real estate developer/promoter to maintain separate bank accounts for each of his projects registered separately under the RERA Act, 2016. In the case of the Respondent, the above provision implies that he was required to maintain five separate escrow/bank accounts in respect of the Five Phases of the project “Eco Village-2”, however, the DGAP’s Report has no mention of this aspect. It has a bearing on the instant proceedings since the DGAP’s Report dated 09.06.2020 only covers one of the five Phases i.e. ‘Phase-r. As the Respondent had obtained five separate RERA registrations for his five Phases, he should have maintained separate escrow/bank accounts. In case the Respondent has not complied with the above-mentioned provision of the RERA Act, 2016, then the entire project “Eco Village-2” comprising all its Phases, should be considered as a single project for the computation of profiteering, given that the Respondent has been maintaining a common ITC register/ITC ledger for all the Phases of his said project and has been filing common GST Returns for all the Phases of the said project “Eco Village-2”. Hence, the compliance of the Respondent with the above-referred provisions of the RERA Act, 2016, becomes paramount and needs to be examined. Given this, there arises the need to revisit the investigation to ascertain if the Respondent has passed on the benefit of ITC to the homebuyers of the other 4 Phases of the impugned project by a commensurate reduction in the prices of the residential units supplied by him in terms of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017.
Hence, in terms of the provisions of Section 171(2) of the CGST Act and for the reasons detailed in Para 21 above, the DGAP is directed to further investigate the present case under Rule 133 (4) of the CGST Rules, 2017 to ensure that the Respondent has passed on the benefit of ITC by way of a commensurate reduction in the prices in respect of all the residential units supplied by him. Hence, without dwelling upon any other aspect of the case and without going into any other contentions of the Respondent and the Applicants, this Authority, under the powers conferred on it vide Rule 133(4) of the CGST Rules read with Section 171(2) of the CGST Act 2017, directs the DGAP to reinvestigate this case and to recompute the quantum of profiteering based on above findings.
The DGAP is directed to submit a fresh Report after a detailed investigation as per Rule 129 (6) of the above Rules, 2017.
FULL TEXT OF ORDER OF NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING APPELLATE AUTHORITY
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
