https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424286 NAPA ruled on anti-profiteering allegations against a property developer regarding two projects. For "The Serenas" project, the Authority found no profiteering as the project was entirely launched post-GST implementation with no pre-GST price history for comparison. However, for "Signum 36" project, NAPA determined the developer profiteered Rs. 42,21,321 by not passing ITC benefits to shop buyers. The developer was ordered to refund this amount with 18% interest and reduce future prices commensurate with ITC benefits. While penalty provisions under Section 171(3A) CGST Act applied, no penalty was imposed as the violation period preceded the provision's effective date. en-us Wed, 22 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Apr 2025 16:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424286 NAPA ruled on anti-profiteering allegations against a property developer regarding two projects. For "The Serenas" project, the Authority found no profiteering as the project was entirely launched post-GST implementation with no pre-GST price history for comparison. However, for "Signum 36" project, NAPA determined the developer profiteered Rs. 42,21,321 by not passing ITC benefits to shop buyers. The developer was ordered to refund this amount with 18% interest and reduce future prices commensurate with ITC benefits. While penalty provisions under Section 171(3A) CGST Act applied, no penalty was imposed as the violation period preceded the provision's effective date. Case-Laws GST Wed, 22 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424286