Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Sh. Priyanshu Pathak Vs Forever Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. (NAA)
Appeal Number : Case No. 19/2022
Date of Judgement/Order : 07/06/2022
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Sh. Priyanshu Pathak Vs Forever Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. (NAA)

The Authority finds that all the events i.e. the Licences, RERA Certificate, booking, the draw, allotment of flats, BBA, construction activity and receipt of payments has taken place in the post-GST era. It is also clear that the Applicant No. 1 was allotted flat only after coming in to force of the GST w.e.f. 01.07.2017 as the first tax invoice for demand cum allotment to him was raised on 29.07.2019, hence apparently there was no pre-GST tax rate or input tax credit availability that could be compared with the post-GST tax rate and the input tax credit, to determine whether there was any benefit that was required to be passed on by way of reduced price.

From the above facts, the Authority finds that, it is established that there had been no additional benefit of ITC to the Respondent and hence he was not required to pass on the benefit to the Applicant No. 1 by reducing the price of the flat. The Applicant No.1 could have availed the above benefit only if the above project was under execution/implementation before coming into force of the GST as the Respondent would have been eligible to avail ITC on the purchase of goods and services after 01.07.2017 on which he was not entitled to do so before the above date. Since there was no basis for comparison of ITC available before and after 01.07.2017, the Respondent was not required to recalibrate the price of the flat due to additional benefit of ITC. Hence, the allegations of the Applicant No. 1 made in this behalf are incorrect and therefore, the same cannot be accepted.

FULL TEXT OF ORDER OF NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY

1. The present Report dated 25.02.2021 received on 26.02.2021 has been received from the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after investigation under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017.

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

Sponsored

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Your email address will not be published.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