-
NAA has no mandate to look into the matter whether the Respondent has wrongly charged GST from the Applicants. The Applicants may take up the matter with the jurisdictional CGST/SGST officers.
Rajendra Meena & Ors. With DGAP vs. Logix Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4408 (NAA)
-
NAA - Respondent to furnish the data within 30 days and DGAP to reinvestigate the matter.
DGAP vs. M/s Dange Enterprises
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4407 (NAA)
-
NAA - Builder benefitted from the additional ITC to the extent of 2.67% of the turnover - Guilty of profiteering.
Ajay Kumar and DGAP vs. Pivotal Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4369 (NAA)
-
No penalty provisions were existent at the time of violation by the Respondent, penalty prescribed u/s 17(3A) cannot be imposed retrospectively.
DGAP vs. Signature Global Developers Pvt. Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4368 (NAA)
-
Respondent is completely free to fix prices but under the garb of free market price cannot enrich himself at the expense of the unorganized, voiceless and vulnerable customers.
M. Srinivas and DGAP vs. Infinity Retail Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4354 (NAA)
-
No fetters have been placed either in the CGST Act or Rule 129 of the CGST Rules, 2017 which provide that DGAP shall restrict his investigation to the complained goods or services and would overlook commission of an offence committed u/s 171(1) while supplying other goods or services if it comes to its notice during the course of investigation.
DGAP vs. Starbucks Coffee
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4349 (NAA)
-
The Respondent in terms of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 was bound to maintain the base prices of the tickets across all classes of seats and GST should have been charged on the pre rate reduction basis and that there was no profiteering on tickets of First Class and Second Class category during the period from March 11, 2019 to May 08, 2019.
DGAP vs. Devi 70 MM Pvt Ltd
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4328 (NAA)
-
The presumption of DGAP that the payment of GST to the sub-contractor and availability of credit thereof was an absolute benefit to the Respondent is correct as the Respondent is availing full benefit of ITC on the GST paid by him to its sub-contractor and is not paying it from his own account.
DGAP, Shashank Thakar & Ors. vs. Alton Buildtech India Pvt. Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4327 (NAA)
-
Vide Section 112 of the Finance Act, specific penalty provisions have been added for profiteering w.e.f. January 01, 2020, which weren’t existent when the Respondent violated provisions and therefore penalty prescribed cannot be imposed.
DGAP vs. Signature Builders Pvt. Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4324 (NAA)
-
Method used for computation of profiteering in this case becomes an aberration and thus unacceptable.
DGAP vs. Smookey Kitchen Foods OPC Pvt. Ltd. (franchisee of M/s Subway Systems India Pvt. Ltd.)
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4293 (NAA)
-
No provision of penalty for violation of section 171(1) i.e. for not passing of benefit of tax reduction or ITC has been prescribed u/s 122(1)(i), therefore penalty under the said section cannot be imposed.
DGAP vs. Puri Constructions Pvt. Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4135 (NAA)
-
Penalty u/s 171(3A) shouldn’t be imposed as the provision has been inserted w.e.f. 01.01.2020 while the period for violation was June, 2017- July, 2018, and it cannot have retrospective operation, therefore, withdraws penalty provisions.
DGAP vs. Horizon Projects Pvt. Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4134 (NAA)
-
GST registration of Respondent was cancelled and therefore, it had not filed GSTR-3B Returns from September, 2018 onwards and GSTR-1 Returns from January, 2019 onwards.
DGAP vs. M/s Aryan Hometec Pvt. Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4133 (NAA)
-
Penalty could only be imposed when there was mens rea and deliberate attempt to violate the provisions of law and as it had complied with the Authority’s order, the same depicts his bonafide intention therefore, penalty shouldn’t be imposed on it.
DGAP vs. VTWO Ventures
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4132 (NAA)
-
Since no penalty provisions u/s 171(3A) were existent during the period of violation i.e. 01.07.2017-31.08.2018, same cannot be imposed on Respondent retrospectively.
DGAP vs. M/s S3 Infrareality Pvt. Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4131 (NAA)
-
Passing on the benefit of GST is regulated under CGST Act, 2017 and not under Andhra Pradesh Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1955 and hence no prior approval of the State Govt. is required to pass on the benefit.
DGAP vs. PVR Ltd
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4129 (NAA)
-
DGAP during investigation found that Respondent had not passed the benefit of tax reduction in respect of the two products between November 15, 2017 to March 31, 2018, therefore, committed profiteering as per provisions of Section 171(1) of Act.
DGAP vs. M/s Harish Bakers & Confectioners Pvt. Ltd
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4102 (NAA) · Section 171
-
Penalty u/s 171 (3A) cannot be applicable as no penalty provisions were existent during the period in which profiteering was committed.
DGAP vs. M/s Edelco Infrastructures & Properties Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4093 (NAA)
-
Any benefit of tax rate reduction passed onto a particular recipient cannot be adjusted against the benefit of tax rate reduction accruing to another recipient.
DGAP vs. M/s Gaurav Sharma Food Industries
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4022 (NAA)
-
Provision of facilities is not covered in anti-profiteering measures provided in CGST Rules/Act, hence, said issue cannot be resolved by this Authority.
DGAP vs. Adarsh Thought Works Pvt. Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3996 (NAA)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.