Case Law Details
Potnoor Naveen Vs Caroa Properties LLP (National Anti-Profiteering Authority)
It is also evident from the perusal of the facts of the present case that the Respondent has denied benefit of ITC to the buyers of the flats and the shops being constructed by him in his Project ‘Godrej City Panvel Phase-I’ in contravention of the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 and has apparently committed an offence under Section 171 (3A) of the above Act and therefore, he is apparently liable for imposition of penalty under the provisions of the above Section. Accordingly, a Show Cause Notice be issued to him directing him to explain as to why the penalty prescribed under Section 171 (3A) of the above Act read with Rule 133 (3) (d) of the CGST Rules, 2017 should not be imposed on him. Accordingly, the notice dated 02.07.2019 vide which it was proposed to impose penalty under Section 29, 122-127 of the above Act read with Rule 21 and 133 of the CGST Rules, 2017 is withdrawn to that extent.
It is also revealed from the perusal of Table-‘A’ mentioned in para 8 (a) of the Report dated 25.06.2019 furnished by the DGAP that the Respondent has admitted that he is executing two more projects ‘Golf Meadows Godrej City, Panvel Phase II project’ and the ‘EWS. project’. It is also apparent from para 8 (c) of the above Report that the Respondent has also admitted that he has availed benefit of CENVAT credit in the pre-GST period for the above two projects. The Respondent has also furnished the details of the CENVAT credit and the ITC availed by him on these projects during the pre-GST and the post-GST periods in the Tables given supra vide his submisSions dated 06.09.019. Therefore, this Authority has reasons to believe that the Respondent has availed the benefit of ITC during the post-GST period which he is bound to pass on to the buyers of the above projects. Therefore, this Authority under Rule 133 (5) of the CGST Rules, 2017 quoted supra directs the DGAP to conduct investigation to find out whether the Respondent has availed such benefit in respect of both the above projects and is required to pass it on as per the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 and submit his Report as per the provisions of the above Rule.
This Authority as per Rule 136 of the CGST Rules 2017 directs the Commissioner of CGST/SGST Maharashtra to monitor this order under the supervision of the DGAP by ensuring that the amount profiteered by the Respondent’ as ordered by this Authority is passed on to all the eligible buyers. A Report in compliance of this order shall be submitted to this Authority by the concerned Commissioner through the DGAP within a period of 4 months from the date of issue of this order.
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.
