Latest GST Judgments

For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on GST
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our GST Library

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.

Anti-profiteering- The brief facts of the present case are that the Applicant vide his Report furnished to this Authority under Rule 129 (6) of the CGST Rules, 2017, had submitted that he had conducted an investigation on the complaint of the Applicants No. 1 to 12 and found that the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of additional Input tax Credit (ITC) to the above Applicants as well as other home buyers who had purchased Flats in his Project “Green Court”, as per the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017. 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the notice dated 04.02.2020 issued to the Respondent for imposition of penalty under Section 171 (3A) is hereby withdrawn and the present penalty proceedings launched against him are accordingly dropped.