Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful)

TaxTMI AI Drafter workflow from input facts to final legal draft Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2020 (4) TMI 905 - NAPA - GST

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Respondent failed to pass on Input Tax Credit benefit post-GST, ordered to repay Rs. 24,78,383. The Authority found that the Respondent did not pass on the benefit of Input Tax Credit (ITC) to the recipients post-GST implementation, resulting in ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Respondent failed to pass on Input Tax Credit benefit post-GST, ordered to repay Rs. 24,78,383.

                            The Authority found that the Respondent did not pass on the benefit of Input Tax Credit (ITC) to the recipients post-GST implementation, resulting in profiteering. The Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) calculated the profiteered amount to be Rs. 24,78,383, including Rs. 37,107 from Applicant No. 1. The DGAP was directed to further investigate the blocked ITC, consideration in profiteering calculations, and verification of the Respondent's claims within three months.




                            Issues Involved:

                            1. Whether the benefit of Input Tax Credit (ITC) was passed on by the Respondent to the Applicant and other recipients.
                            2. Whether the DGAP exceeded its jurisdiction by including customers other than the Applicant No. 1.
                            3. Whether the calculation of profiteering should consider ITC availed or ITC utilized.
                            4. Whether the Respondent's claim of passing on ITC benefits through discounts and credit notes was valid.
                            5. Whether the blocked ITC by State GST authorities should be considered in the calculation of profiteering.

                            Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Benefit of ITC Passed On:
                            The Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) conducted an investigation to determine if the Respondent passed on the benefit of ITC post-GST implementation. The investigation covered the period from 01.07.2017 to 31.03.2019. The DGAP found that the Respondent benefited from additional ITC of 1.74% of the turnover, which was not passed on to the recipients. The DGAP calculated that the Respondent profiteered an amount of Rs. 24,78,383/-, including Rs. 37,107/- from Applicant No. 1.

                            2. Jurisdiction of DGAP:
                            The Respondent contended that the DGAP exceeded its jurisdiction by calculating profiteering for customers other than Applicant No. 1. The DGAP argued that Section 171 of the CGST Act mandates passing on the benefit of ITC to all recipients, not just the complainant. The DGAP stated that restricting the investigation to the complainant would deny other recipients their due benefit.

                            3. Calculation of Profiteering (ITC Availed vs. ITC Utilized):
                            The Respondent argued that the DGAP should consider ITC utilized (Rs. 1.6 Crore) instead of ITC availed (Rs. 3.31 Crore) for calculating profiteering. The DGAP maintained that the amount of credit availed was taken in all investigations, as unutilized credit would be used in the future to offset tax liabilities.

                            4. ITC Benefits Through Discounts and Credit Notes:
                            The Respondent claimed to have passed on ITC benefits through discounts and credit notes, amounting to Rs. 9,61,130/-. The DGAP verified the credit notes and found that they were issued after the investigation period. The DGAP stated that the Respondent did not produce these credit notes during the investigation.

                            5. Blocked ITC by State GST Authorities:
                            The Respondent argued that the DGAP's calculation of profiteering was erroneous as it included ITC of Rs. 1,77,50,478/- blocked by the State GST authorities. The DGAP acknowledged that the ITC was blocked on 28.03.2019 but stated that it was available to the Respondent during the investigation period. The DGAP could not ascertain the reason for blocking the ITC.

                            Order:
                            The Authority directed the DGAP to further investigate the following issues:
                            1. Verification of the blocked ITC amounting to Rs. 1,77,50,478/-.
                            2. Consideration of the blocked ITC in the calculation of profiteering.
                            3. Verification of the Respondent's claim of passing on ITC benefits amounting to Rs. 9,61,130/-.
                            4. Verification of the Respondent's claim of passing on ITC benefits to Applicant No. 1 amounting to Rs. 95,205/-.

                            The DGAP was instructed to submit a fresh report within three months. The order was delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic and was passed under the Notification No. 35/2020-Central Tax dated 03.04.2020. Copies of the order were supplied to the Applicants, the Respondent, and the Deputy Commissioner SGST, Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh for necessary action.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found