2020 (9) TMI 98

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er / Decisions)<br>Dated:- 27-8-2020<br>Case No. 56/2020 - -<br>GST<br>DR. B N. SHARMA, CHAIRMAN, SH. J. C CHAUHAN, TECHNICAL MEMBER, SH. AMAND SHAH, TECHNICAL MEMBER Present:- 1. None for the Applicants. 2. Ms. Shuchi Agrawal, Legal Counsel and Sh. Shraman Kumar Gupta, Authorised Representatives for the Respondent. ORDER 1. The brief facts of the present case are that the Applicant....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rom 01.07.2017 to 30.09.2018 and had thus indulged in profiteering and violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the above Act. 2. This Authority after careful consideration of the Report dated 22.04.2019 had issued notice dated 26.04.2019 to the Respondent to show cause why the Report furnished by the DGAP should not be accepted and his liability for violation of the provisions of Sect....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... apparently committed an offence under Section 171 (3A) of the CGST Act, 2017 and hence, he was liable for imposition of penalty under the provisions of the above Section. 4. The Respondent was issued notice dated 26.11.2019 asking him to explain why the penalty mentioned in Section 171 (3A) read with Rule 133 (3) (d) should not be imposed on him. 5. The Respondent vide his submissions dated....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....submission he has made is that penalty should not be imposed on him as the provisions of Section 171 (3A) have come into force from 01.01.2020 and they cannot have retrospective operation. He has also submitted that penalty should only be imposed when there is mens rea and deliberate attempt to violate the provisions of law. 6. We have carefully considered the submissions of the Respondent and ....