https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310678 NAPA found no profiteering case against respondent developer regarding Samyama City Tower 1-D project under section 171(1) of CGST Act, 2017, as RERA approval, bookings, and price fixation occurred after GST introduction with payments received post July 1, 2017. However, NAPA took suo motu cognizance of respondent's nine other projects where profiteering investigation was pending, directing DGAP to investigate and report whether respondent failed to pass ITC benefits to buyers in these projects. en-us Tue, 10 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Apr 2025 11:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310678 NAPA found no profiteering case against respondent developer regarding Samyama City Tower 1-D project under section 171(1) of CGST Act, 2017, as RERA approval, bookings, and price fixation occurred after GST introduction with payments received post July 1, 2017. However, NAPA took suo motu cognizance of respondent's nine other projects where profiteering investigation was pending, directing DGAP to investigate and report whether respondent failed to pass ITC benefits to buyers in these projects. Case-Laws GST Tue, 10 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310678