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 from 15.11.2017 to 31.07.2018 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, had submitted that he had conducted an investigation on the complaint of the Applicant No. 1 and found that the Respondent on the supply of “Matchless Plus TTWG Grinder” had not passed on the benefit of reduction in the rate of tax from 28% to 12% w.e.f. 15.11.2017, vide Notification No. 41/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated 14.11.2017 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 from 15.11.2017 to 31.07.2018 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the notice dated 28.03.2019 issued to the Respondent for imposition of penalty under Section 122 (1) (i) is hereby withdrawn and the present penalty proceedings launched against him are accordingly dropped.
Join Whats App Group
Check Your Tax Knowledge
Product Demo
Tax Lok English Viedo
Tax Lok Hindi Viedo
whatsapp with taxlok SUBSCRIBE OUR MAGAZINE

FOR FREE CONDUCTED TOUR OF OUR ON-LINE LIBRARIES WITH OUR REPRESENTATIVE-- CLICK HERE