Developer must reduce flat prices after failing to pass ITC benefits to buyers under section 171

NAPA held that the respondent developer violated section 171 of CGST Act by not passing on ITC benefits to flat buyers. Investigation revealed respondent received additional ITC of 8.27% of turnover (9.88% post-GST vs 1.61% pre-GST) for the project but failed to reduce flat prices accordingly. NAPA ordered respondent to reduce prices commensurate with ITC benefit of Rs. 6,33,70,091 and imposed penalty under section 171(3A). Authority directed DGAP to investigate respondent's other projects for similar profiteering violations.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Verification of Input Tax Credit (ITC) benefit passed on to buyers.
2. Calculation of interest on profiteered amount.
3. Reconciliation of turnover discrepancies.
4. Eligibility of VAT credit claimed.
5. Methodology for calculating profiteering.
6. Segregation of pre-GST and post-GST periods.
7. Applicability of anti-profiteering provisions to different parts of the project.

Issue-wise Analysis:

1. Verification of ITC Benefit Passed on to Buyers:
The Respondent claimed to have passed on ITC benefits amounting to Rs. 1,55,06,800/- to buyers. The DGAP was directed to verify this by obtaining acknowledgments from 10% of the buyers. It was found that the Respondent had passed on Rs. 1,41,636/- to 7 homebuyers, including Rs. 19,680/- to the Applicant. However, the Respondent still needed to pass on Rs. 6,32,28,455/- to 820 homebuyers, including Rs. 37,877/- to the Applicant.

2. Calculation of Interest on Profiteered Amount:
The Respondent was directed to pass on interest at 18% on the profiteered amount from the date of receiving additional consideration until the ITC benefit was passed on. The DGAP was instructed to compute and ensure the payment of interest to eligible buyers.

3. Reconciliation of Turnover Discrepancies:
The Respondent's turnover for the periods April 2016 to June 2017 and July 2017 to June 2019 needed reconciliation. The Respondent provided figures for other projects and copies of GSTR-9, substantiating that the turnover in statutory returns included figures from multiple projects.

4. Eligibility of VAT Credit Claimed:
The Respondent claimed VAT credit of Rs. 1,07,07,174/- for the period April 2016 to June 2017. The DGAP verified the eligibility of this claim based on the Haryana VAT Act, 2003, and found that the Respondent was eligible for the claimed VAT credit.

5. Methodology for Calculating Profiteering:
The DGAP used the ratio of ITC to turnover for calculating the profiteered amount. The Respondent contested this methodology, arguing that it did not consider the actual benefit of ITC and used incorrect tax rates. The DGAP clarified that the methodology was consistent with legal principles and had been upheld in similar cases.

6. Segregation of Pre-GST and Post-GST Periods:
The DGAP compared the percentage of ITC to turnover in pre-GST (April 2016 to June 2017) and post-GST (July 2017 to October 2020) periods. The ITC as a percentage of turnover increased from 1.61% pre-GST to 9.88% post-GST, indicating an additional ITC benefit of 8.27%.

7. Applicability of Anti-Profiteering Provisions to Different Parts of the Project:
The Respondent argued that Tower 10 should be excluded from the investigation as it was launched in the post-GST regime. The DGAP and the Authority found that since the entire project had a single RERA registration, the investigation covered all parts of the project. The Respondent's claim was not tenable, and the investigation was correctly carried out for the entire project.

Conclusion:
The Authority found that the Respondent had profiteered an amount of Rs. 6,33,70,091/- and ordered the Respondent to pass on this amount to the buyers along with 18% interest. The Respondent was also directed to reduce the price commensurate with the ITC benefit. The jurisdictional CGST/SGST Commissioner was tasked with ensuring compliance and submitting a report within four months. The Authority also directed the DGAP to investigate the Respondent's other projects for potential profiteering.

---