TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Respondent ordered to pass on Input Tax Credit benefits, pay penalty, and interest under CGST Act.</h1> <h3>Shri Deepak Kumar Khurana, Director General of Anti-Profiteering, Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs, Versus M/s. Sattva Developers Pvt. Ltd.</h3> Shri Deepak Kumar Khurana, Director General of Anti-Profiteering, Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs, Versus M/s. Sattva Developers Pvt. Ltd. - ... Issues Involved:1. Alleged non-passing of Input Tax Credit (ITC) benefits by the Respondent.2. Methodology for calculating profiteering.3. Respondent's contention regarding market-driven pricing and project duration.4. Comparison with the Pyramid Infratech Pvt. Ltd. case.5. Calculation of ITC benefit and profiteering amount.6. Penalty for issuing incorrect tax invoices.Detailed Analysis:1. Alleged Non-Passing of ITC Benefits:The Applicant No. 1 booked a flat in the Respondent's project and alleged that the Respondent did not pass on the benefit of ITC by reducing the price after the introduction of GST. The Karnataka State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering forwarded the application to the Standing Committee, which then referred it to the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) for detailed investigation.2. Methodology for Calculating Profiteering:The DGAP's investigation revealed that the Respondent had availed ITC till June 2018. The DGAP calculated the proportionate ITC benefit to be passed on by considering the total saleable area and the total ITC availed. The DGAP found that the Respondent had a higher ITC ratio post-GST (7.79%) compared to pre-GST (5.13%), resulting in an increased ITC benefit of 2.66%.3. Respondent's Contention Regarding Market-Driven Pricing and Project Duration:The Respondent argued that real estate pricing is market-driven and influenced by various factors, making the DGAP's methodology inappropriate. However, the judgment clarified that Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 mandates the passing of ITC benefits to consumers, irrespective of market conditions or project duration. The completion certificate received on 07.03.2018 further validated the DGAP's methodology.4. Comparison with the Pyramid Infratech Pvt. Ltd. Case:The Respondent referred to the Pyramid Infratech case, where the methodology for calculating profiteering was questioned. However, the judgment noted that the Delhi High Court had only granted an interim arrangement and had not stayed the methodology. Thus, the comparison was deemed irrelevant.5. Calculation of ITC Benefit and Profiteering Amount:The DGAP's report determined the total profiteered amount as Rs. 99,20,246/-, including GST. This amount was calculated based on the increased ITC benefit post-GST and the payments made by buyers after 01.07.2017. The Respondent's claim of passing on Rs. 9 per sq. ft. as ITC benefit was rejected due to lack of supporting documents.6. Penalty for Issuing Incorrect Tax Invoices:The judgment found that the Respondent had denied ITC benefits to buyers and issued incorrect tax invoices, thus committing an offense under Section 122(1)(i) of the CGST Act, 2017. A Show Cause Notice was ordered to be issued to the Respondent for imposing a penalty.Conclusion:The Respondent was ordered to reduce the prices commensurate with the ITC benefits and pass on the profiteered amount of Rs. 99,20,246/- to the eligible buyers, along with interest @18% per annum. The Commissioners of CGST/SGST Karnataka were directed to monitor compliance with this order.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
