<?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>2026 (1) TMI 378 - GSTAT NEW DLHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784622</link>
    <description>The dominant issue was whether the respondent had failed to pass on the benefit of input tax credit to homebuyers, warranting acceptance of the anti-profiteering investigation findings. The Tribunal held that, since the respondent unconditionally accepted the findings, observations, and conclusions in the DGAP report to avoid further litigation, no justiciable dispute survived for adjudication; on that legal basis, the DGAP report was accepted, and the proceedings were concluded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2026 08:22:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=876668" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (1) TMI 378 - GSTAT NEW DLHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784622</link>
      <description>The dominant issue was whether the respondent had failed to pass on the benefit of input tax credit to homebuyers, warranting acceptance of the anti-profiteering investigation findings. The Tribunal held that, since the respondent unconditionally accepted the findings, observations, and conclusions in the DGAP report to avoid further litigation, no justiciable dispute survived for adjudication; on that legal basis, the DGAP report was accepted, and the proceedings were concluded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784622</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>