Anti-Profiteering — In the instant case, applicant had stated that the Respondent had resorted to profiteering in respect of supply of construction service related to purchase of Apartment No. 041305, Tower-04, 13th Floor, in the project “Shriram Chirping Woods”, Kasavanahalli Village, Varthur Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk, Bangalore. The Applicant No. 1 had also alleged that the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of Input Tax Credit (ITC) by way of commensurate reduction in the price of the apartment purchased by him, on implementation of GST w.e.f. 01.07.2017.
Held that— In view of the fact that there was no reduction in the rate of tax nor there was increased additional benefit on account of ITC, the provisions of Section 171 of CGST Act, 2017 could not be invoked in this case.
Respondent had not availed any additional benefit of ITC post-GST as compared to pre-GST therefore there was no contravention of the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017.— Rahul Kumar Agrawal, Sh. Virander Singh Sirohi, Mr. Subrata Das, Sh. Chintan B Parekh, Director General of Anti-Profiteering, Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs Vs. Shrivision Homes Pvt. Ltd. [2019] 12 TAXLOK.COM 038 (NAPA)