<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2023 (7) TMI 1288 - COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441015</link>
    <description>SC ruled that a real estate developer was not liable to pass on Input Tax Credit (ITC) benefits to buyers for projects beyond &quot;Tinsel Town&quot;. The investigation revealed the developer exclusively worked on one project under a single GSTIN. As no profiteering was found and the project was previously investigated, the anti-profiteering proceedings were dropped.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2025 17:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=721084" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (7) TMI 1288 - COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441015</link>
      <description>SC ruled that a real estate developer was not liable to pass on Input Tax Credit (ITC) benefits to buyers for projects beyond &quot;Tinsel Town&quot;. The investigation revealed the developer exclusively worked on one project under a single GSTIN. As no profiteering was found and the project was previously investigated, the anti-profiteering proceedings were dropped.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441015</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>