https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405042 The court addressed the discrepancy between the National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAPA) and Directorate General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) regarding the passing on of input tax credit. While DGAP found the petitioner had passed on the credit, NAPA concluded no penalty was due. The court ordered further examination as DGAP had not conducted the investigation. Respondent's counsel changed representation due to conflicting views. A stay was placed on NAPA's order, with the next hearing scheduled to resolve the input tax credit issue. en-us Thu, 04 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Mar 2025 12:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405042 The court addressed the discrepancy between the National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAPA) and Directorate General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) regarding the passing on of input tax credit. While DGAP found the petitioner had passed on the credit, NAPA concluded no penalty was due. The court ordered further examination as DGAP had not conducted the investigation. Respondent's counsel changed representation due to conflicting views. A stay was placed on NAPA's order, with the next hearing scheduled to resolve the input tax credit issue. Case-Laws GST Thu, 04 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405042