TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (12) TMI 1204
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....AL MEMBER Present:- 1. None for the Applicants. 2. Shri Subhash Joshi, Partner, Shri Vivek Sharma and Ms. Ananya Sharma, Advocates for the Respondent. ORDER 1. The brief facts of the present case are that the Applicant No. 2 (here-in-after referred to as the DGAP) vide his Report dated 16.03.2018, furnished to this Authority under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Rules,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....8 had issued notice dated 23.03.2018 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 Section 171 (1) should not be fixed. After hearing both the parties at length this Authority vide its Order No. 06/2018 dated 07.09.2018 = 2018 (9) TMI 625 - THE NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY had determined the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....09.2018 asking him to explain why the penalty mentioned in Section 122 (1) of the Act read with Rule 133 (3) (d) of the CGST Rules, 2017 should not be imposed on him. 5. The Respondent vide his submissions dated 28.09.2018has made a number of submissions for non-imposition of penalty. The main submission he has made is that the penal provisions under Section 122 (1) of the Act read with Rule 133 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sal of the CGST Act and the Rules framed under it that no penalty had been prescribed for violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the above Act, therefore, the Respondent was issued show cause notice to state why penalty should not be imposed on him for violation of the above provisions as per Section 122 (1) (i) of the above Act as he had apparently issued incorrect or false invoice whi....