Omitted specified domestic transaction provision invalidates related-party expenditure transfer-pricing references and assessments based on consequent...
Preventive suspension requires an immediate continuing threat and cannot become indefinite without inquiry, fresh evidence, or proportionate safeguard...
The AT affirmed that, following review of the DGAP report and hearing, no reduction in GST rate nor accrual of benefit from Input Tax Credit arose in respect of the respondent's projects "Gurgaon Hills" and "Grand Hyatt Gurgaon Residences," and therefore no anti-profiteering liability under Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 attached. Consequently, the AT held that the statutory requirement to pass on benefit of rate reduction or ITC was not triggered and ordered disposal of the proceedings against the respondent. The AT directed supply of the order to the respondent and the concerned Commissioner CGST/SGST for administrative action.
The AT affirmed that, following review of the DGAP report and hearing, no reduction in GST rate nor accrual of benefit from Input Tax Credit arose in respect of the respondent's projects "Gurgaon Hills" and "Grand Hyatt Gurgaon Residences," and therefore no anti-profiteering liability under Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 attached. Consequently, the AT held that the statutory requirement to pass on benefit of rate reduction or ITC was not triggered and ordered disposal of the proceedings against the respondent. The AT directed supply of the order to the respondent and the concerned Commissioner CGST/SGST for administrative action.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.