Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2020 (9) TMI 99

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ka Kochar, Ms. Raj Kumari, Sh. Puran Lal, Sh. Sanjay Singh Rawat, Ms. Rajni Nagar, Ms. Sandhya Patro, Ms. Neha, Sh. Jitender Kumar, Sh. Neeraj Kumar, Ms. Mukta Taneja, Sh. Rajneesh Jain, Sh. Lalit Mohan Parashar, Sh. Bhasker Pandey, Sh. Jitendra Ms. Archana Khanna, Mr. Asif Khan/Ms. Shahjahan, Sh. R Bisht, bisht., Sh. Nitin Gupta, Sh. Sailesh Dikshit, Sh. Aman Sandhu, Sh. Deepak Kaul, Sh. Sarika Jindal, Ms. Ashmeet Nanda, Ms. Prashant Kumari, Mrs. Jyoti Kedia, Sh. Prem Kumar Dubey, Sh. Ankush Raghav, Sh. Hemant Kumar on behalf of Ms. Geeta De, Sh. Shyam Kumar, Sh. Dinesh Trivedi, Sh. Mohit Gupta, Sh. Sawan Chopra, Sh. Akhil, Sh. Sh. Himanshu Jain, Sh. Naveen Jain, Sh. Gaurav Sharma, Ms. Shipra Grover, Sh. Bhagat Singh, Sh. Romil Mishra, Ms.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d his liability for violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1) should not be fixed. After hearing the concerned parties at length this Authority vide its Order No. 67/2019 dated 09.12.2019 = 2019 (12) TMI 585 - NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY had determined the profiteered amount as Rs. 2,69,77,661/- as per the provisions of Section 171 (2) of the above Act read with Rule 133 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017 pertaining to the period from 01.07.2017 to 31.12.2018 and also held the Respondent in violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1). 3. It was also held that the Respondent had denied the benefit of ITC by not reducing prices of the flats commensurately and had also compelled the buyers to pay more price and GST on the addit....