Latest GST Judgments

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

The Respondent has denied benefit of ITC to the buyers of the flats being constructed by him in his above project in contravention of the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 and has thus resorted to profiteering.

Anti-Profiteering — The Applicant No. 1 had alleged profiteering by the Respondent in respect of purchase of a 3BHK Flat No. 806, H-Block, 8th Floor in “Aparna Serene Park” project of the Respondent. The above Applicant had also alleged that the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of Input Tax Credit (ITC) availed by him, by way of commensurate reduction in the price of the above flat.

This Authority under Rule 133 (3) (a) of the CGST Rules, 2017 orders that the Respondent shall reduce the prices to be realized from the buyers of the flats commensurate with the benefit of ITC received by him as has been detailed above. Since the present investigation is only up to 31.03.2019 any benefit of ITC which accrues subsequently shall also be passed on to the buyers by the Respondent. The concerned Commissioner CGST/SGST shall ensure that the above benefit is passed on to the eligible flat buyers. In case the above benefit is not passed on by the Respondent the Applicant No. 1 or any other buyer shall be at liberty to approach the Telangana State Screening Committee to initiate fresh proceedings against the Respondent as per the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017.

It is also evident from the above narration of the facts that the Respondent has denied benefit of ITC to the buyers of the flats being constructed by him in his above project in contravention of the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 and has thus resorted to profiteering. Hence, he has committed an offence under Section 171 (3A) of the CGST Act, 2017 and therefore, he is apparently liable for imposition of penalty under the provisions of the above Section. Accordingly, a Show Cause Notice be issued to him directing him to explain why the penalty prescribed under Section 171 (3A) of the above Act read with Rule 133 (3) (d) of the CGST Rules, 2017 should not be imposed on him. — Abhishek Singh, Director General of Anti-Profiteering, Central Board of Indirect Taxes, And Customs Vs. Aparna Constructions And Estates Pvt. Ltd. [2020] 22 TAXLOK.COM 003 (NAPA)