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>Authority finds Respondent violated CGST Act by not passing on Input Tax Credit benefits, issues penalty & compliance order.</h1> <h3>Sh. Vasanthbhai Bhikabhai Patel, Director General of Anti-Profiteering, Indirect Taxes and Customs Versus M/s. Shree Infra</h3> Sh. Vasanthbhai Bhikabhai Patel, Director General of Anti-Profiteering, Indirect Taxes and Customs Versus M/s. Shree Infra - TMI Issues Involved:1. Non-passing of Input Tax Credit (ITC) benefits.2. Calculation and determination of profiteering amount.3. Compliance with Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017.4. Penalty for contravention of anti-profiteering provisions.5. Scope of investigation limited to Phase-II of the project.Detailed Analysis:1. Non-passing of Input Tax Credit (ITC) benefits:The Applicant alleged that the Respondent did not pass on the benefit of ITC by reducing prices for two flats in the 'River View Heights' project. The DGAP's investigation revealed that the Respondent acknowledged the project was under construction and had not quantified the ITC benefit due to the absence of an Occupancy Certificate. The Respondent's claim that the entire consideration was paid post-GST was verified through sale agreements and payment details.2. Calculation and determination of profiteering amount:The DGAP's report indicated that the Respondent benefited from an additional ITC post-GST, increasing from 2.37% pre-GST to 2.65% post-GST, resulting in a net benefit of 0.28%. The DGAP compared the applicable tax rates and ITC ratios between pre-GST and post-GST periods, recalibrating the basic price and determining the excess realization (profiteering) amount as Rs. 2,13,468/-. This included 12% GST on the base profiteering amount of Rs. 1,90,596/-, affecting 26 home buyers.3. Compliance with Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017:The Authority confirmed the DGAP's findings and determined that the Respondent had indeed benefited from additional ITC and had not passed this benefit to the buyers, contravening Section 171(1) of the CGST Act, 2017. The Respondent agreed to pass on the computed benefit of Rs. 2,13,468/- to the buyers, including interest at 18% from the date of realization until payment.4. Penalty for contravention of anti-profiteering provisions:The Respondent's failure to pass on the ITC benefits constituted an offence under Section 171(3A) of the CGST Act, 2017. The Authority directed the issuance of a Show Cause Notice to the Respondent to explain why the penalty prescribed under Section 171(3A) should not be imposed.5. Scope of investigation limited to Phase-II of the project:The investigation was restricted to Phase-II of the 'River View Heights' project. The Authority noted discrepancies in the total area of the project provided by the Respondent and directed the DGAP to investigate the entire project to ensure compliance with Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017.Conclusion:The Authority ordered the Respondent to reduce prices commensurate with the ITC benefit received and pass on any future benefits to buyers. The Commissioners of CGST/SGST Gujarat were directed to monitor compliance and ensure the profiteered amount was passed on to eligible buyers, with a compliance report to be submitted within four months.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
