Goods and Services Tax : Even after the sunset clause, anti-profiteering obligations continue through tribunals and policy directions, leaving businesses e...
Goods and Services Tax : The Delhi High Court upheld an anti-profiteering order, ruling that merely increasing product quantity or volume after a GST rate ...
Goods and Services Tax : GSTAT ruled 18% interest on GST anti-profiteering amounts applies prospectively from April 1, 2020, upholding that it cannot be im...
Goods and Services Tax : Delhi HC rules increasing product quantity or base price instead of reducing MRP after a GST rate cut violates Section 171 of the ...
Goods and Services Tax : GST 2.0 rate cuts trigger Anti-Profiteering rules (Sec 171). Summary covers obligation to pass on tax/ITC benefit, MRP display nor...
Goods and Services Tax : Leading consumer and public policy research and advocacy group, CUTS International has requested the Finance Minister, Ms Nirmala ...
Goods and Services Tax : Empanelment of Advocates / Law Firms for representing the National Anti-profiteering Authority and Director General of Anti-Profit...
Goods and Services Tax : Anti-Profiteering Measures The National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA) was constituted on 28th November, 2017 under Section 17...
Goods and Services Tax : GSTAT held that retaining the same ticket prices after GST reductions amounted to profiteering under Section 171 of the CGST Act. ...
Goods and Services Tax : The Tribunal held that procurement strategy, supplier oversight, and sourcing support formed part of a substantive procurement ser...
Goods and Services Tax : GSTAT accepted the DGAP finding that the ratio of credit availed to purchase value declined after GST implementation. Since no add...
Goods and Services Tax : GSTAT held that the retailer failed to pass on the benefit of GST reduction from 28% to 18% through commensurate price cuts. The T...
Goods and Services Tax : GSTAT held that permissions relating to ticket pricing could not override the statutory requirement to pass on GST rate reduction ...
Goods and Services Tax : GST Authority will stop accepting requests for examination of input tax credits and tax rate reductions from April 1, 2025, as per...
Goods and Services Tax : Ministry of Finance empowers GST Appellate Tribunal to examine input tax credits and tax rate reductions, effective from October 1...
Goods and Services Tax : Central Goods and Services Tax (Fourth Amendment) Rules, 2022 – CBIC omitted following GST Rules 122,124,125,134 and 137 vi...
Goods and Services Tax : CBIC notifies Competition Commission of India to examine whether input tax credits availed by any registered person or the reducti...
The dispute concerned failure to reduce prices after GST. The Tribunal held that documentary evidence showed benefit was already transferred to buyers.
GSTAT held that no anti-profiteering violation arises where construction, agreement, and payments occur entirely in the GST regime. Since prices already factored ITC, no benefit was required to be passed on.
The issue involved a calculation error in the final order. The Tribunal clarified the correct per sq. ft. benefit including GST and directed proper computation.
The Tribunal held that no profiteering occurred as the ITC-to-purchase value ratio declined after GST implementation. It ruled that no additional benefit arose, eliminating the obligation to pass on ITC benefits to buyers.
The case examined whether GST rate cuts were passed on to consumers. The authority held that increasing base prices instead of reducing ticket prices violated Section 171, resulting in confirmed profiteering and refund directions.
The case involved non-passing of ITC benefits after GST implementation. The Tribunal held that full ITC gains must be passed on and ordered refund with interest.
The issue included verification of ITC benefit among buyers. The Tribunal relied on DGAP findings and the builder’s acceptance to confirm liability. The ruling underscores the evidentiary role of buyer confirmations.
The Tribunal held that even a marginal increase in ITC must be passed on to buyers. Failure resulted in refund liability with interest under Section 171. The ruling confirms that interest is payable from the date of excess collection. Arguments to defer interest to project completion were rejected.
The case confirms that an increase in ITC must result in price reduction for buyers. The Tribunal found profiteering where such benefit was not passed on, directing refund with interest.
GSTAT accepted the DGAP investigation finding that the developer retained additional ITC benefit after GST introduction. The amount must be passed on to buyers with interest.
