TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
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>Profiteering Reconciliation: Court directs document exchange for compliance</h1> <h3>M/s. Nirala Projects Pvt. Ltd., M/s. S3 Buildwell LLP., M/s. JMK Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union Of India & Ors.</h3> The court addressed the reconciliation of profiteering amounts passed on to customers by different entities. JMK Holdings Pvt. Ltd. and M/s S3 Buildwell ... Profiteering - Mr. Prakash’s say that, since Nirala Projects Pvt. Ltd. did not furnish the necessary details, the reconciliation exercise could not be carried out - HELD THAT:- Given the fact that two out of three entities have, it appears, passed on a substantial amount qua the purported profiteered amount, to their customers, the respondents will not, for the moment, subject the petitioners to coercive measures. List the matters on 09.08.2021. Issues Involved: Reconciliation of profiteering amounts passed on to customers by different entities, submission of necessary details by a specific entity, interaction between counsels, decision on coercive measures, and scheduling of the next hearing.Reconciliation of Profiteering Amounts:The judgment involves a dispute regarding the reconciliation of profiteering amounts passed on to customers by different entities. One entity, JMK Holdings Pvt. Ltd., has passed on Rs. 2,49,03,518/- against a profiteering amount of Rs. 3,58,90,871/-. Similarly, M/s S3 Buildwell LLP has passed on Rs. 2,22,85,626/- against a profiteered amount of Rs. 2,69,77,661/-. However, Nirala Projects Pvt. Ltd. did not furnish necessary details, hindering the reconciliation exercise. The court directed the parties to interact and exchange necessary documents for reconciliation before the next hearing.Submission of Necessary Details:The petitioner's counsel disputed the respondent's claim that Nirala Projects Pvt. Ltd. did not submit the required details. Mr. Puneet Agarwal argued that the necessary details concerning Nirala Projects Pvt. Ltd. have been provided. This disagreement led to a directive for the exchange of documents between the counsels to facilitate the reconciliation process.Interaction Between Counsels:In light of the conflicting claims regarding the submission of necessary details, the counsels representing the petitioners and respondents were instructed to interact with each other. Mr. Agarwal was tasked with providing all essential documents to Mr. Prakash for reconciliation purposes. This interaction was aimed at resolving the discrepancies and ensuring a comprehensive reconciliation process.Decision on Coercive Measures:Considering that two out of three entities had passed on a significant amount in relation to the profiteered amount to their customers, the court decided not to subject the petitioners to coercive measures at the moment. This decision was based on the actions taken by the entities in passing on substantial amounts, indicating a cooperative approach towards addressing the profiteering issue.Scheduling of Next Hearing:The judgment concluded by scheduling the next hearing for 09.08.2021, indicating the court's intention to continue monitoring the progress of the reconciliation process and any further developments in the case. The next hearing date was set to ensure timely follow-up on the interactions between the counsels and the completion of the reconciliation exercise.
TaxTMI 
