Search
Advanced Search Search with field filters
/adv
Navigation
Home Go to homepage
/home
Direct Tax Income Tax resources
GST GST Acts, Rules & Case Laws
Company Law Companies Act & SEBI
Due Date Tracker Statutory compliance deadlines
/due
Due Date Calendar Calendar view of compliance deadlines
Daily Digest Today's tax updates and articles
/digest
Landmark Rulings

Anti-profiteering Authority — GST

102 rulings

  1. Anti-profiteering Authority · 28 Jun 2022
    Benefit of ITC is passed on to each recipient of supply with interest @ 18% from the date that such amount was profiteered till the date of return of such profiteered amount as per Rule 133 of CGST Rules, 2017.

    Parveen Kumar Bansal and DGAP vs. Sternal Buildcon Pvt. Ltd.

    (2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6439 (NAA)

  2. Anti-profiteering Authority · 27 Jun 2022
    Prescription of time limit under Rule 133(1) and 129(6) are not mandatory and Respondent’s plea regarding non-observance of time limits are untenable.

    DGAP vs L‘Oreal India Pvt Ltd.

    (2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6433 (NAA)

  3. Anti-profiteering Authority · 20 May 2022
    A single formula, which fits all, cannot be set while determining such a 'methodology and procedure' as the facts of each case are different.

    Deshpande Constructions and DGAP vs. Anutone Acoustics

    (2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6261 (NAA)

  4. Anti-profiteering Authority · 18 May 2022
    No ITC benefit is to be passed on the unsold units and the ITC earned on them is to be reversed.

    DGAP vs. DLF Ltd.

    (2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6247 (NAA)

  5. Anti-profiteering Authority · 17 May 2022
    Since ITC accrued on purchase of the material and the GST was payable on accrual basis and the project wise Cenvat/Input tax account was to be maintained by the builder. The Respondent could have passed on the benefit of ITC on a provisional basis, which he has not done.

    DGAP vs. Total Environment Habitat Pvt. Ltd.

    (2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6244 (NAA)

  6. Anti-profiteering Authority · 16 May 2022
    No such provision of facilitating payment of determined profiteered amount in instalments exists under the GST Act or Rules.

    DGAP vs. Piccadilly Square Movie Complex

    (2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6239 (NAA)

  7. Anti-profiteering Authority · 16 May 2022
    DGAP is directed to investigate into profiteering aspect in respect of 9 other projects undertaken by Respondent and submit report, in view of the fact that, even though Respondent obtained 10 separate RERA registrations for 10 projects, separate escrow/bank accounts was not maintained as mandated by RERA Act, 2016.

    DGAP vs Adhiraj Constructions Pvt Ltd

    (2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6238 (NAA)

  8. Anti-profiteering Authority · 14 Apr 2022
    Where there is no reduction in GST rates and Respondent continues to pay GST at the old rate of 12% on Construction Service, provisions of Section 171 cannot be made applicable in view of the fact that there was no additional ITC which had been utilised by the respondent relevant for establishing allegation of profiteering.

    DGAP vs Lodha Developers Ltd.

    (2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6118 (NAA)

  9. Anti-profiteering Authority · 14 Apr 2022
    Apparently, there was no pre-GST tax rate or ITC availability that could be compared to determine whether there was any benefit that was required to be passed to buyer.

    DGAP vs Alton Buildtech India Pvt. Ltd.

    (2022) TaxCorp(IDT) 6117 (NAA)

  10. Anti-profiteering Authority · 22 Mar 2021
    Once the Respondent has claimed that he had passed down ITC benefit and claimed the benefit of such amount, the onus is on Respondent to prove that ITC benefit was actually passed on to eligible buyers.

    DGAP vs. Prestige Estate Projects Ltd.

    (2021) TaxCorp(IDT) 4762 (NAA)

  11. Anti-profiteering Authority · 04 Jan 2021
    DGAP’s claim that MRF had not passed the benefit of tax reduction by increasing the base price in the post reduction period, is contrary to its clarification and is required to explain the contradiction made in its Reports.

    DGAP vs. MRF Corp. Ltd.

    (2021) TaxCorp(IDT) 4516 (NAA)

  12. Anti-profiteering Authority · 01 Jan 2021
    Since no penalty provisions were in existence when the violation was committed, therefore penalty cannot be imposed retrospectively.

    DGAP vs. Aster Infrahome Pvt. Ltd.

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4513 (NAA)

  13. Anti-profiteering Authority · 01 Jan 2021
    Since no penalty provisions were in existence when the Respondent had violated the provisions of Section 171(1), the penalty cannot be imposed on the Respondent retrospectively.

    DGAP vs. Sharma Trading Company

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4512 (NAA)

  14. Anti-profiteering Authority · 29 Dec 2020
    Since no penalty provisions were in existence during the profiteering period above mentioned, penalty prescribed under section 171(3A) cannot be imposed retrospectively.

    DGAP vs. M/s Fusion Buildtech Pvt. Ltd.

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4506 (NAA)

  15. Anti-profiteering Authority · 14 Dec 2020
    Despite specific profiteering admission of Respondent, DGAP has restricted his investigation to the home buyers only and failed to investigate the profiteering in the case of flats allocated to landowners.

    Aruna Popat and DGAP vs. Shalwak Infrabulls

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4457 (NAA)

  16. Anti-profiteering Authority · 14 Dec 2020
    Respondent is instructed to submit returns to DGAP intimating the expenditure and the progress made in construction of every separately registered project.

    Sibi John and DGAP vs. Logix City Developers Pvt. Ltd.

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4456 (NAA)

  17. Anti-profiteering Authority · 11 Dec 2020
    As this Authority has not assumed any jurisdiction, which was hitherto being exercised by this High Court or any other judicial body, the principle that there must be a Judicial Member does not apply to the composition of this Authority.

    DGAP vs. Hardcastle Restaurants

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4453 (NAA)

  18. Anti-profiteering Authority · 02 Dec 2020
    Investigation shall be carried out w.e.f July 01, 2017 to November 30, 2020 or till the date Occupation Certificate has been received by the Respondent in respect of Respondent’s under-construction projects.

    Ram Prakash Sharma, Naresh Arora and DGAP vs. BPTP Ltd.

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4425 (NAA)

  19. Anti-profiteering Authority · 02 Dec 2020
    The main issue of profiteering by the Respondent has already been addressed and settled by this Authority.

    DGAP vs. Prasad Media Corporation Pvt. Ltd.

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4424 (NAA)

  20. Anti-profiteering Authority · 02 Dec 2020
    NAA - Respondent guilty of profiteering u/s 171(1) of the CGST Act, by not passing on the benefit of tax rate reduction from 28% to 18%.

    Srinivas & DGAP vs. Electronics Mart India Ltd.

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4423 (NAA)

Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.


An unhandled error has occurred. Reload ×

Rejoining the server...

Rejoin failed... trying again in seconds.

Failed to rejoin.
Please retry or reload the page.

The session has been paused by the server.

Failed to resume the session.
Please retry or reload the page.