Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Mohit Arora Vs Lodha Developers Ltd (NAA)
Appeal Number : Case No. 96/2020
Date of Judgement/Order : 11/12/2020
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Mohit Arora Vs Lodha Developers Ltd (NAA)

Since no penalty provisions were in existence between the period w.e.f. 01.07.2017 to 31.08.2018 when the Respondent had violated the provisions of Section 171 (1), the penalty prescribed under Section 171 (3A) cannot be imposed on the Respondent retrospectively. Accordingly, the notice dated 18.12.2020 issued to the Respondent for imposition of penalty under Section 171 (3A) is hereby withdrawn and the present penalty proceedings launched against him are accordingly dropped.

FULL TEXT OF ORDER OF NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING  AUTHORITY

1. The brief facts of the present case are that the Applicant No. 2 (here­in-after referred to as the DGAP) vide his Report dated 28.11.2018, furnished to this Authority under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017, had submitted that he had conducted an investigation on the complaint of the Applicant No. 1 and found that the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of input tax credit (ITC) in respect of the flat No. 704, Building-2, Lodha Eternis, Andheri East Mumbai, in “Lodha Eternis” Project of the Respondent on introduction of the GST w.e.f. 01.07.2017, as per the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017. Vide his above Report the DGAP had also submitted that the Respondent had denied the benefit of ITC to the above Applicant and other buyers amounting to Rs. 1,90,04,456/- pertaining to the period from 01.07.2017 to 31.08.2018 and had thus indulged in profiteering and violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the above Act.

2. This Authority after careful consideration of the Report dated 28.11.2018 had issued notice on 05.12.2018 to the Respondent to show cause why the Report furnished by the DGAP should not be accepted and his liability for violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1) should not be fixed. After hearing the concerned parties this Authority vide its Order No. 48/2019 dated 03.10.2019 had determined the profiteered amount as Rs. 1,90,04,456/- as per the provisions of Section 171 (2) of the above Act read with Rule 133 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017 pertaining to the period from 01.07.2017 to 31.08.2018 and also held the Respondent in violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1).

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Tags:

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031