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to impose penalty under Section 29, 122-127 of the above Act read with Rule 21 and 133 of the CGST Rules, 2017 is withdrawn to that extent.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
1. The present Report dated 25.06.2019 and the supplementary Report dated 07.10.2019 has been received from the Applicant No. 2 i.e. the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after detailed investigation under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the case are that the Applicant No. 1 had filed an application dated 12.10.2018 before the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering, under Rule 128 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017 and submitted that he had purchase a flat in the Respondent’s project “Godrej City Panvel Phase-I” situated at Khanvale, Panvel, Raigarh-410206 and alleged that the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of input tax credit to him by way of commensurate reduction in price of the flat, in terms of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017.
2. The above reference was examined by the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering and vide minutes of its meeting dated 13.12.2018 it had forwarded the same to the DGAP for detailed investigation under Rule 129 (1) of the above Rules.
3. The DGAP on receipt of the application had issued notice dated 15.01.2019 to the Respondent to reply as to whether he admitted that the benefit of ITC had not been passed on to the Applicant No. 1 by way of commensurate reduction in the price and if so to suo moto determine the quantum there of and indicate the same in his reply to the notice as well as furnish all the supporting documents. The Respondent was also given an opportunity to inspect the non-confidential evidences/information submitted by the above Applicant. The Respondent availed this opportunity and inspected the The DGAP, vide e-mail dated 14.06.2019, had also given the Applicant No. 1 an opportunity to inspect the non-confidential evidences/information sub Mitted by the above Respondent. The Applicant No. 1, vide e-mail dated 17.06.2019, had submitted that he had been residing in Mumbai and it would be extremely difficult for him to visit the office of DGAP. Thus, vide-e-mail dated 20.06.2019, the DGAP provided him the copies of the non-confidential documents submitted by the Respondent.
4. The DGAP had sought extension of time for completing the investigation which was extended by this Authority vide its order dated 19.03.2019 in terms of Rule 129 (6) of the CGST Rules, 2017. The period of the investigation is from 01.07.2017 to 31.12.2018.
5. The Respondent had replied to the Notice issued by the DGAP vide various letters but had not furnished the complete and the relevant documents required for investigation. The DGAP, thus, had issued Summons under Section 70 of the CGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 132 of the above Rules on 11.06.2019 to the Respondent and asked him to appear before the Superintendent of the office of DGAP on 06.2019 and produce the relevant documents. In response, the Authorised Representative of the Respondent had appeared on 17.06.2019 and submitted partial documents and sought one week’s time to submit the remaining documents.
6. The Respondent has submitted his replies vide letters/e-mails dated 01.2019, 12.02.2019, 14.05.2019, 11.06.2019, 14.06.2019, 17.06.2019, 18.06.2019, 19.06.2019, 20.06.2019 and 21.06.2019 vide which he has submitted that he was engaged primarily in the business of real estate construction, development and other related activities. He has also furnished the status of various projects undertaken and developed by him as is given in the Table- ‘A’ below:-
Table-‘A’
