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 penalty prescribed under Section 171 (3A) cannot be imposed on the Respondent retrospectively. Accordingly, the notice issued to the Respondent for imposition of penalty under Section 177 (3A) is hereby withdrawn

Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017— Anti- Profiteering – The DGAP submitted that after investigation on the complaint of the Applicant and found that the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of additional ITC to the Applicant who had purchased a Flat in his Project “Fusion Homes”, as per the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the Act, 2017. The Respondent had denied the benefit of ITC to the Applicant and other buyers amounting to Rs. 4,79,04,342/-, pertaining to the period w.e.f. 01.07.2017 to 30.09.2018 and had thus indulged in profiteering and violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the above Act. The Respondent submitted that he had challenged Authority’s order dated 13.12.2019 confirming profiteering of Rs. 4.79 crores, before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, who had asked him to deposit 50% of the amount only and requested that penalty proceedings be kept in abeyance. The authority observed the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of additional ITC to the Applicant as well as other homebuyers. Further, observed 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. Held that:- The Hon’ble Anti-Profiteering Authority directed that the notice issued to the Respondent for imposition of penalty under Section 177 (3A) is withdrawn and the present penalty proceedings launched against him are dropped.