AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (3) TMI 405
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s, 2017. The brief facts of the present case are that an application dated 23.08.2018 was filed before the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering under Rule 128 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017 by the Applicant No. 1 alleging profiteering by the Respondent. The Applicant No. 1 had alleged in his application that he had purchased Flat No. 05, Type-B, 2nd floor, in the project Kishalay Abasan, 14/3 Ghoshpara and the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of Input Tax Credit (ITC) to him by way of commensurate reduction in the price, on introduction of the GST w.e.f. 01.07.2017. The West Bengal State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering had examined the above application in its meeting held on 19.11.2018 and observed that there was merit in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pre-GST era. In response to the Notice dated 09.04.2019, the Respondent has submitted his reply vide letters and e-mails dated 08.05.2019 and 27.05.2019 along with the following documents/information:- (a) Copies of GSTR-1 Returns for the period from July, 2017 to March, 2019. (b) Copies of GSTR-3B Returns for the period from July, 2017 to March, 2019. (c) Copies of ST-3 Returns for the period from April, 2016 to June, 2017. (d) Copies of sale agreement/contract with the above Applicant. (e) Copies of Audited Balance Sheets for the FY 2016-17 & FY 2017-18. 5. The DGAP has further stated that the Respondent, vide his letter dated 27.05.2019, submitted copy of the sale agreement wherein the Resp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 12% in view of 1/3rd abatement on value) vide Notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 and the effective GST rate on construction service in respect of the affordable and the low-cost houses upto a carpet area of 60 square metres was further reduced from 12% GST (effective rate was 8% in view of 1/3rd abatement on value), vide Notification No. 1/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 25.01.2018 (in respect of affordable and low-cost house upto a carpet area of 60 square meters). Thus it was submitted that in the case of construction service the effective rate of tax (@ 4.5%) in the Pre-GST era was lower than the effective rate of tax @ 8% or 12%, in the Post-GST era. 7. The DGAP has further submitted that during the pre-GST e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... inputs. Post-GST, the Respondent was eligible to avail input tax credit of GST paid on inputs and input services. However, from the Table- B it was clear that the Respondent had not availed any credit in the pre-GST or the post-GST era. Hence no comparison of the amount of credit available in the pre or the post GST era could be made. Therefore, the DGAP has claimed that in the absence of availment of any credit by the Respondent, there may not be any benefit of Input Tax Credit which has to be passed on by way of commensurate reduction in price. 10. The DGAP has also contended that:- (a) After the introduction of GST w.e.f. 01.07 2017, the rate of tax on the construction services has increased. Thus the instant case was not co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... I. Whether there was any reduction in the rate of tax on construction service w.e.f. 01.07.2017 in respect of the present case? II. Whether there was any increased benefit of ITC w.e.f. 01.07.2017.? III. Whether there was any violation of the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 by not passing on the benefit? 14. It is clear from the perusal of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 127 of the CGST Rules, 2017 that this Authority is required to determine whether any reduction in the rate of tax on any supply of goods or services or the benefit of input tax credit has been passed on to the recipients by way of commensurate reduction in prices or not. Accordingly this Authority has to examine....