Goods and Services Tax : Explore the constitutional validity of Anti-Profiteering provisions under GST, their impact on businesses and consumers, and the l...
Goods and Services Tax : Explore the sunset of the National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA) under GST and its logical end. Learn about its functions, mer...
Goods and Services Tax : Reason 1: Anti-profiteering provisions are Ultra vires of Article 246A of the Constitution Reason 2: Constitution of NAA is contra...
Goods and Services Tax : The Hon’ble National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA), in the case of DGAP vs. Hardcastle Restaurants [Case No. 79/2020 dated D...
Goods and Services Tax : D.S. Brothers Vs Durga Marketing Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) GST Profiteering of Rs. 1,57,200 established in the case of supply of Duracell Ba...
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 : The tenure of National Anti-Profiteering Authority has been extended by 2 years. The Council also decided to introduce electronic ...
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 : The National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA) has been constituted under Section 171 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2...
Goods and Services Tax : The Tribunal held that maintaining ticket prices by increasing base price after GST reduction violated Section 171. It directed de...
Goods and Services Tax : The case addressed increased ITC benefits post-GST without corresponding price reduction. The tribunal ruled this violated Section...
Goods and Services Tax : The case examined whether GST rate cuts were passed on to consumers. The authority held that increasing base prices instead of red...
Goods and Services Tax : GSTAT held that although profiteering of ₹1.70 crore was computed, the developer had passed on ₹2.02 crore to home-buyers. Wit...
Goods and Services Tax : The Tribunal accepted the DGAP report finding no extra ITC benefit after GST implementation and held that Section 171 was not viol...
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...
Goods and Services Tax : I have been further directed to request you to take all possible steps envisaged under the GST Laws to ensure that the legislative...
Goods and Services Tax : Field formations shall henceforth, also defend the cases on behalf of National Anti‑profiteering Authority (GST), New Delhi pend...
Deputy Commissioner of State Tax Vs A. J. Enterprises (NAA) NAA observe that the DGAP in his Report dated 20.08.2020 has mentioned the investigation period from 15.11.2017 to 30.09.2019 while the profiteering has been computed upto 31.10.2019 as has been shown in Annexure 25 of his Report. The DGAP vide his supplementary Report dated 24.11.2020 […]
Sh. Darshan Joshi Vs M/s. Lodha Developers Ltd. (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) The brief facts of the present case are that the Applicant No. 1 had filed an application stating that the Respondent had resorted to profiteering in respect of the supply of construction services related to the purchase of Flat No. 1201 in the project […]
Director General of Anti-Profiteering Vs Alton Buildtech India Pvt. Ltd (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) Perusal of the record reveals that the Project `Aangan’ consist of three Phases viz. I, II and III. Regarding Phase I the DGAP vide Report dated 14.06.2019 had alleged Profiteering of Rs. 6,24,48,008/- and the same had been confirmed by this Authority […]
Leading consumer and public policy research and advocacy group, CUTS International has requested the Finance Minister, Ms Nirmala Sitharaman that penalties under the Central GST Act, 2018 for profiteering should be deposited in the Consumer Welfare Fund.
I have been further directed to request you to take all possible steps envisaged under the GST Laws to ensure that the legislative intent of Section 171 of the CGST Act is complied with and to issue appropriate directions to your officers to take action as mandated under Section 171 of the CGST Act and wherever required, to utilise the powers conferred vide provisions of Section 67 (12) of the CGST Act for collection of evidence which may be required to take action against errant suppliers of various goods and services.
Deepak Naik Vs Prestige Estate Projects Ltd. (NAA) We find this to be a fit case where the Respondent’s claim of having passed on the benefit to his recipients/homebuyers requires to be verified against third party evidence in the form of written acknowledgements receipts from the homebuyers evidencing the receipt of the benefit, including its […]
DCIT Vs Dough Makers India Pvt. Ltd (NAA) It was alleged that Respondent No. 1 supplying restaurant service has increased the base prices of his products and has not passed on the benefit of reduction in the GST rate from 18% to 5% w.e.f. 15.11.2017, affected vide Notification No. 46/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 14.11.2017 by […]
The Hon’ble National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA), in the case of DGAP vs. Hardcastle Restaurants [Case No. 79/2020 dated December 9, 2020] held that, the Hardcastle Restaurants (Respondent) has committed an offence by denying the benefit of rate reduction to the buyers of his products in contravention of the provisions of Section 171(1) of the Central […]
Potnoor Naveen Vs Caroa Properties LLP (NAA) NAA held that Since, no penalty provisions were in existence between the period w.e.f. 01.07.2017 to 31.12.2018 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 10.02.2020 issued […]
Crown Express Dental Lab Vs Theco India Private Limited (NAA) From the perusal of Section 122 (1) (i) of the CGST Act, 2017, it is clear that the violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1) is not covered under Section 122 (1) (i) of the CGST Act, 2017 as it does not provide penalty […]
