TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (6) TMI 1252
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Respondent, The Applicant No 1 had alleged that the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of input tax credit (ITC) to him by way of commensurate reduction in the price of the Flat No. C-402 purchased from the Respondent in the Respondent's project "Sierra-Vizag", situated at Vizag on introduction of GST w.e.f. 01.07.2017, in terms of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017. 2. The DGAP in his Report dated 28.02.2020, inter-alia stated that-- i. The aforesaid application was examined by the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering, in its meeting held on 05.07.2019, the minutes of which were received by the DGAP on 05.08 2019, whereby it was decided to forward the same to the DGAP to conduct a detailed investigation in the matter. Accordingly. investigation was initiated to collect evidence necessary to determine whether the benefit of input tax credit had been passed on by the Respondent to the Applicant No. 1 in respect of construction service supplied by the Respondent. ii. On receipt of the reference from the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering, a notice under Rule 129 of the Rules was issued by the DGAP on 14 08.2019, calling upon the Respondent to reply as to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ad also submitted the following documents/information: a. Copies of GSTR-1 Returns for the period July, 2017 to July, 2019 b. Copies of GSTR-3B Returns for the period July, 2017 to July, 2019. c. Copy of Trans-1 filed by the Respondent. d. Electronic Credit Ledger for the period July, 2017 to Jufy,2017, e. Copies of VAT returns (including all annexures) & ST-3 Returns for the period April, 2016 to June, 2017. f. Copies of all demand letters issued and sale agreement made with the Applicant. g. Copy of Balance Sheet for Financial Years 2016-17 & 2017-18. h. Details of VAT, Service Tax, ITC of VAT, Cenvat credit for the period April, 2016 to June,2017 and output GST and ITC of GST for the period July, 2017 to July. 2019. i. Copy of Electronic Credit Ledger for the period 01.07.2017 to 31.07.2019. j. Cenvat/Input Tax Credit Register for the Financial Years 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 and for the period April, 2019 to July, 2019 reconciled with VAT, ST-3 and GSTR-3B return, k. Details of applicable tax rates, Pre-GST and Post-GST, l. List of home buyers in the project 'Sierra-V....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Particulars Percentage (%) pf Payment 1. On Booking 10.00% 2. Within 60 days from date of booking 10.00% 3. On Commencement Work 10.00% 4. On Commencement of Basement/Parking 10.00% 5. On Commencement of 1^st Floor Slab 10.00% 6. On Commencement of 3^rd Floor Slab 10.00% 7. On Commencement of 6^th Floor Slab 10.00% 8. On Commencement of 9^th Floor Slab 5.00% 9. On Commencement of 12^th Floor Slab 5.00% 10. On Commencement of 15^th Floor Slab 5.00% 11. On Commencement of Finishing Work 10.00% 12. On Possession + Other Charges + Stamp Duty +Registration charges 5.00% TOTAL 100.00% xi. Another relevant point in this regard was para 5 of Schedule-III of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act. 2017 (Activities or Transactions which shall be treated neither as a supply of goods nor a supply of services) which read as "Sale of land and, subject to clause (b) of paragraph 5 of Schedule II, sale of building", Further, clause (b) of Paragraph 5 of Schedule II of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read as "(b) construction of a complex, building, civ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Respondent covering the period April, 2016 to July, 2019, the details of the input tax credits availed by him. his turnover from the project "Sierra-Vizag". the ratios of input tax credits to turnovers, during the pre-GST (April, 2016 to June. 2017) and post-GST (July. 2017 to March, 2019) periods, have been furnished in Table-C below, Table-'C' (Amount in Rs.) Sr.No Particulars Total (Pre-GST) April, 2016 to June, 2017 Total (Post-GST) July, 2017 to March, 2019 1. CENVAT of Service Tax Paid on Input Services used for flats (A) 2,63,75,303 - 2. Input Tax Credit of VAT Paid on Purchase of Inputs (B) - 3. Total CENVAT/Input Tax Credit Available (C)=(A+B) 2,63.75,303 - 4. Input Tax Credit of GST Availed (D) - 9,88,30,603 5. Turnover for Flats as per Home Buyers List (E) 54.54.89,453 70,51,84,975 6. Total Saleable Area (in SQF) (F) 8,43.855 8,43,855 7. Total Sold Area (in SOF) relevant to turnover (G) 6,21.980 7,07,175 8. Relevant ITC [(H)=(C)*(G)/(F) or (D)*(G)/(F)] 1,94.40,438 8,28,22,916 Ratio of Input Tax Credit Post-GST [(I)=(H)/(E)] 3.5....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... GST raised over Base Price (Rs.) F=E*B 8,46,22.197 8. Total Demand raised G=E+F 78,98.07,172 9. Recalibrated Base Price H=E*(1-D) or 91.82% of E 64,75,00,844 10. GST @ 12% 7,77,00,101 11. Commensurate demand price J=H+I 72,52,00,945 12. Excess Collection of Demand or Profiteering Amount K=G-J 6,46,06,227 From Table-D' above, it was clear that the additional input tax credit of 8.18% of the turnover should have resulted in the commensurate reduction in the base price as well as cum-tax price. Therefore, in terms of Section 171 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the benefit of such additional input tax credit was required to be passed on to the recipients. xiv. On the basis of the above calculation explained in Table-D on the basis of the aforesaid CENVAT/input tax credit availability pre and post-GST and the details of demand raised by the Respondent from the Applicant No 1 and other home-buyers in respect of the units booked by the Respondent as on 31.03 2019, the benefit of input tax credit that needed to be passed on by the Respondent to the buyers of flats came to Rs. 6,46,06,22....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s and addresses along with Unit no. allotted to them. Therefore, this additional amount of Rs. 6,44,43,844/. was also required to be returned to such eligible recipients (homebuyers) ii. As aforementioned, the present investigation covered the period from 01 07 2017 to 31.03.2019 Profiteering, if any, for the period post March, 2019, had not been examined as the Respondent opted for a new scheme issued vide Notification No. 03/2019-Central Tax (Rate) dated 29.03.2019 In terms of this Notification the Respondent was required to pay Tax/GST @ 5% without taking/availing the benefit of ITC. Thus, the Respondent was not eligible to avail the input tax credit w.e.f. 01.04.2019 and Section 171 of CGST Act. 2017 was not attracted. 4. The above Report was Carefully considered by this Authority and it was decided to allow the Respondent to file his consolidated written submissions by 21.07.2020. A notice dated 13,07.2020 was issued to the Respondent to explain why the Report dated 26.06.2020 furnished by the DGAP should not be accepted and his liability for profiteering in violation of the provisions of Section 171 should not be fixed. 5. The Respondent filed his written submi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stered person to the recipient by way of commensurate reduction in prices. ii. That neither this Authority nor any other provision of GST Laws had prescribed any mechanism or methodology for determining anti-profiteering measure. In the absence of a determining mechanism, the entire investigation undertaken by the DGAP was unconstitutional and without authority of law. iii. That it was settled law that in the absence of a machinery provision for assessment of tax, the levy itself failed and was liable to be struck down as unconstitutional. Reliance was placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner, Central Excise & Customs, Kerala vs. Larsen & Toubro Limited 2016 (1) SCC 170 wherein it was held that in the absence of machinery provisions for computation of taxable value in case of composite works contract. levy of Service Tax would become non-existent. iv That reliance was placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.C. Srinivasa Setty 1981 (2) SCC 460 wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court observed as follows: 10..... Section 45 is a charging section. For the purpose of imposing the c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ure. This Authority had also not dealt with the anti-profiteering computation mechanism vide its National Anti-profiteering under Goods and Services Tax Methodology and Procedure. 2018. It was also relevant to note that the methodology prescribed under the said document was essentially a reiteration of what had already been provided in the CGST Rules (Rule 122 to 137) vi. That no methodology or procedure had been laid down for determining: a) whether there was a benefit from reduction of price, b) the quantum of benefit- whether the cost incurred by an assessee on account of raw material, transport, labour, withdrawal of government subsidies and any other cost incurred for passing on the benefit should be taken into account since it had a bearing on the price of the product: c) the methodology of passing on the benefit in different scenarios; d) the removal of difficulties in cases where passing of benefit in absolute terms was impossible to perform. vii. That in the absence of the above, the action taken by the Standing Committee on anti-profiteering and the DGAP was arbitrary and ought to be quashed. It was submitted that busi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ith respect to a residential project in the name of indiabulls Sierra Vizag", which was in the process of development and the construction work at the project had not been finished yet. Given this, benefit of input tax credit, if any, accruing as a result of this project could not be determined at this stage Consequently, the present investigation proceedings were premature in nature and required to be set aside on this ground alone. ii. That as entire project took number of months to complete, the impact of GST could be ascertained only upon completion of the project. Thus, it would be premature to reach a conclusion on input tax credit benefit to be passed on. iii. That any computation of benefit of input tax credit before the project reaches completion, could only be based on assumptions and surmises. It was settled law that demand raised on assumptions and surmises could not be sustained and was required to be dropped. iv. That on account of change in the GST rate of various products consumed in the process of construction, input tax credit would also be reduced and hence accurate computation of benefit would be possible only when the projects were co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....industry due to the long gestation period. Hence, the simple mathematical exercise done by comparing the input tax credit ratio before and after GST could not be made applicable in the instant case. The Respondent had duly cooperated with the DGAP during the investigation proceedings and had provided all the documents requested by the DGAP Despite this, the DGAP has proceeded to determine profiteering by applying a simple mathematical formula, in complete disregard of the factors affecting the pricing of flats. Consequently, the profiteering amount determined by the DGAP was incorrect and was required to be recomputed. iv. That increase in input tax credit could be due to various factors other than benefit granted by the Government such as increase in rate of tax on input supplies and services, increase in cost of inputs due to higher prices etc. The increase in input tax credit due to such factors could not be considered as -benefit of input tax credit" for the purpose of Section 171. In this regard. it was relevant to note that input services in the pre-GST regime were taxable at the rate of 15% but under the post-GST regime, most input services were taxable at 18%. This....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....39;ble Supreme Court in the case of British India Corporation Ltd. CCE 1978 (2) ELT J307 (SC) 8. The contention that this duty does not amount to a duty of excise because it cannot be passed on by the petitioner to the consumer was not raised before us. It was mentioned in the petition. An Excise Duty is a duty on production and though according to the economists, it is an indirect tax capable of being passed on to the consumer as part of the price yet the mere passing on of the duty is not its essential characteristic. Even if borne by producer or manufacturer it does not cease to be a duty of excise. The nature of such a duty was explained in the very first case of the Federal Court and subsequently in others of the Federal Court, the Privy Council and this Court, but this ground continues to be taken and we are surprised that it was raised again. Similar ratio was laid down under Sales tax Laws. Reliance in this regard was placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of S. Kodar vs. State of Kerala 1974 (4) SCC 422 wherein it was held as follows. 2. The legal incidence of a tax on sale of goods under the Tamil Nadu General Sales ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f input tax credit by way of commensurate reduction in price of Flat No. C-402 purchased from the Respondent in Respondent's project "Sierra-Vizag" situated at Vizag. However, the complaint came to be withdrawn by the Applicant No. 1 himself on 21 10.2019 upon being explained the modalities of computation and being assured that the benefit. if any, would be passed on at the time of possession. Consequent to the above, when the complaint itself stood withdrawn, initiation of Investigation was not warranted at all. That Rule 128 laid down the procedure for initiation of proceedings with respect to anti-profiteering mechanism Relevant part of the rule was extracted hereunder for ready reference: 128. Examination of application by the Standing Committee and Screening Committee.-(1) The Standing Committee shall, within a period of two months from the date of the receipt of a written application or within such extended period not exceeding a further period of one month for reasons to be recorded in writing as may be allowed by the Authority in such form and manner as may be specified by it, from an interested party or from a Commissioner or any other person, examine....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t by way of commensurate reduction in prices. (3) The Director General of Anti-profiteering shall, before initiation of the investigation, issue a notice to the interested parties containing, inter alia, information on the following, namely:- (a) the description of the goods or services in respect of which the proceedings have been initiated; (b) summary of the statement of facts on which the allegations are based; and (c) the time limit allowed to the interested parties and other persons who may have information related to the proceedings for furnishing their reply. (4) The Director General of Anti-profiteering may also issue notices to such other persons as deemed fit for a fair enquiry into the matter. (5) The Director General of Anti-profiteering shall make available the evidence presented to it by one interested party to the other interested parties, participating in the proceedings. (6) The Director General of Anti-profiteering shall complete the investigation within a period of six months of the receipt of the reference from the Standing Committee or within such extended period ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of which allegation was made it was submitted that the DGAP had failed to inform interested parties about the withdrawal of complaint in the Notice required to be issued to interested parties before initiation of investigation. H. The profiteered amount had been incorrectly computed in the Report. i. That without prejudice to the above submissions, even if it was assumed for the sake of argument that the Respondent had gained undue profit on the transaction by not passing on the benefit of input tax credit, even then the computation of undue profit was incorrect. The DGAP had computed the profiteered amount by comparing the input tax credit ratio to turnover of pre-GST and post-GST period. Applying this method, the DGAP had alleged profiteering of Rs. 6,46,06,227/- against the Respondent. It was submitted that the DGAP had incorrectly computed the profiteered amount and the Report was liable to be set aside to this extent. 6. Copy of the above submissions dated 09 11.2020 filed by the Respondent was supplied to the DGAP for clarifications under Rule 133 (2A) of the CGST Rules, 2017 The DGAP filed his clarifications dated 01.12.2020 vide which the DGAP has clarified:-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....03.2018. C. The investigation proceedings being pre mature, were required to be dropped. That the Respondent's claim was not supported by law and in above para No. 5 (C-vi) he himself contradicted his claim made from pare 5 (C-i to C-v). The profiteering had been worked out only up to 31.03.2019 as after that the Respondent was availing composition scheme, In para 15 of the Report, it was clearly mentioned that though the investigation period was from July, 2017 to July. 2019, the period up to March, 2019 instead of July, 2019 had been considered for computation of the profiteering because the Respondent opted for new scheme issued vide Notification No 03/2019- central Tax (rate) dated 29.03.2019. when the Respondent stopped availing ITC from 01.04.2019 profiteering on account of additional ITC cannot be attributed after above date Therefore, Respondent's claim that accurate benefit could be arrived after completion of project was not sustainable in this case of Respondent. D. Computation methodology followed by DGAP did not reflect the true result. That the "Methodology and Procedure' had been enshrined under Section 171 (1) Itself ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to be investigated because there was a single GST return for all the supplies made by a particular registered person and there was also a single credit entry in the ITC ledger of the registered person. H. The profiteered amount had been incorrectly computed in the Report. That the Respondent had not pointed out any mistake in facts and figures. 7. The Applicant No. 1 by e-mail dated 24.12.2020 has filed his submissions vide which he stated:- A. That the Respondent had collected 85% of the agreed value of the flat and collected Service Tax and GST at the prevailing rates of 18% at that time of each Instalment. Total Rs. 2,71,785/- were collected in his case. B. That the tax quantum jumped from Rs. 17,724/- to Rs. 47,257/- per instalment after introduction of GST. He paid total Rs. 2,12,703/- as GST itself in 6 instalments up to October, 2018. C. That even after lapse of 2 years, the Respondent had not informed the calculation of Input Tax Credits nor refunded or adjusted any Input Tax Credits till date and were just avoiding the same with standard reply that the process of calculation at his end was still in process. D. That the Respondent's assu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent has submitted his rejoinder against DGAP's clarifications wherein he has reiterated his earlier submissions dated 09.11.2020. 9. Personal hearing via video conferencing in the matter was held on 05.02.2021, Same was attended by Shri Nagendra Kumar Biyani, Applicant No. 1 in person and Shri Vivek Sharma. Advocate and Shri Amit Shah, Representative for the Respondent During the personal hearing the Respondent reiterated his arguments based on his written submissions dated 09.11.2020 and 04.02.2021. 10. Vide Order dated 05.02.2021, the Respondent was directed by the Authority to supply the proof of his claim that his project `Sierra-Vizag" consisted of 620 units and to file his additional submissions. The Respondent by his email dated 09 02 2021 and 15.02.2021 has submitted his additional/supplementary written submissions vide which he has stated:- A. That the project comprises of 620 flats. The reason for mentioning 545 flats before the DGAP was that these were the flats which stood booked/sold till September 2020. The DGAP vide letter dated 15.01.2020 had asked for customer wise details. The details were provided vide Respondent's letter dated 10.02.2020. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....reciated that, in 2015 at the time of launch of project the tax regime of VAT & Service Tax was in force The GST regime became effective from 01.07.2017 which allowed credit of GST paid on materials and services till March-19 However. effective 1st April-19, businesses were given option to continue with earlier regime of 12% GST, but, the rate of 5% was available without tax benefits. The market dynamics for selling the flats also changed with rate of GST as the difference was fairly substantial for developers/customers. v. The Respondent had explained to the customers the modalities involved in computing the profiteering amount and would pass the benefit, if any on completion of the Project Only 1 customer had filed complaint before the Authorities. which was also withdrawn. The DGAP should consider above facts and permit the Respondent to compute the liability on completion of project. F. That the Respondent did not have the entire costing data for the purpose of computing profiteering (if at all) under GST laws. The position of the Respondent had always remained that the investigation was premature since the Project itself was not complete. That only after the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ime. This amount of the additional benefit of ITC required to be passed on, was with respect to the amount paid by the customers or flat buyers to the Respondent & GST charged from the customers. This had nothing to do with cost of materials and other market factors. iii. The Respondent had raised issue of output tax rate change in pre and post GST, which was not sustainable as calculation of profiteering had nothing to do with output tax. Whether output tax rate was 15% or 18% the Respondent would have charged the same from his customers and would have deposited the same with the Government exchequer. iv. The Respondent had availed composition scheme w.e.f. 01.04.2019. Therefore, the period of profiteering had been covered upto 31.03.2019 in the Report of DGAP dated 26.06.2020. Hence. the contention of the Respondent with respect to change in tax rate did not hold good v. The contention of the Respondent made in relation to the scope of investigation was not correct and it was submitted that Section 171 (2) of the CGST Act, 2017 stated that "The Central Government may on recommendations of the Council, by notification. constitute an Authority, or empower....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....29.04.2021 till 23.02.2022 and the minimum quorum was restored only w.e.f. 23.02.2022 and hence the matter was taken up for further proceedings vide Order dated 24,02,2022 and the Respondent and the Applicant No 1 were given opportunity for personal hearing in the matter on 01.04.2022 The hearing, held on 01.04.2022 via video conferencing, was attended by Sh. Nagendra Kumar Biyani, Applicant No. 1 in person. Sh. Manoj Kumar. Assistant Commissioner represented the Applicant No. 2 and Sh. Vivek Sharma, Advocate and Sh. Ant Shah, Representative. appeared for the Respondent. During the hearing, the Respondent was directed to file his additional submissions. if any, and the explanation on the escalation clause in his sale agreement and the details of sale agreements signed by 483 homebuyers out of 545 homebuyers against whom profiteering has been established in the DGAP's Report dated 26.06 2020. Accordingly, the Respondent has filed his submissions on 07.04.2022 vide which he inter-alia stated that:- a Was there an escalation cost agreed with home buyers in the agreement to sell/contract? Reply. There was no escalation cost agreed with home buyers in the Agreement....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he period July, 2017 to March, 2019. Details of 483 home buyers on whom demand has been raised during the period July. 2017 to March, 2019 were annexed in his submissions dated 07.04.2022. 15. This Authority has carefully considered the Report furnished by the DGAP, all the submissions and the other material placed on record, and the arguments advanced by the Respondent On examining the various submissions we find that the following issues need to be addressed.- a) Whether there was any violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 In this case? b) If yes what was the additional benefit that has to be passed on to the recipients? 16. The Respondent has contended that Section 171 of the CGST Act and Rule 126 of the CGST Rules are violative of Article 14 and Article 19 of the Constitution of India. In this connection, this Authority holds that the Authority has not acted in any way as price controller or regulator as it doesn't have the mandate to regulate the same, The Respondent is absolutely free to exercise his right to practise any profession. or to carry on any occupation, trade or business, as per the provisions of Article 14 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Respondent has submitted that Rule 126 of the CGST Rules is in violation of Section 171 itself. In this regard. the Authority finds that, as per Rule 126 of the CGST Rules, the Authority has been empowered to determine the methodology and procedure for determination as to whether the reduction in the rate of tax or the benefit of input tax credit has been passed on by the registered person to the recipients by way of commensurate reduction in prices or not Rule 126 of the CGST Rules is reproduced below for ready reference: - "126. The authority may determine the methodology and procedure for determination as to whether the reduction in the rate of tax on supply of goods or services or the benefit of input tax credit has been passed on by the registered person to the recipient by way of commensurate reduction in price." Rule 126 of the CGST Rules nowhere stipulates that the Authority must prescribe methodology and procedure to quantify the amount of profiteering. However, the Methodology & Procedure for passing on both the above benefits and for computation of the profiteered amount has been duly prescribed under Section 171 itself and hence, it is not required to be pre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng as a result of this project cannot be determined at this stage. Consequently, the present investigation is premature in nature and is required to be set aside on this ground alone. In this regard, the Authority finds that in his Report the DGAP has mentioned that though the investigation period was from July, 2017 to July, 2019, for computation of the profiteering the period up to March, 2019 has been considered instead of July, 2019 because the Respondent has opted for new scheme issued vide Notification No. 03/2019-C.T.(Rate) dated 29.03.2019, when the Respondent has stopped availing ITC from 01.04,2019. Hence, profiteering on account of additional ITC cannot be attributed after the above date Therefore, the DGAP has correctly worked out the profiteering only up to 31.03.2019 as after that the Respondent has opted for the composition scheme. Hence, the Authority finds that the above submissions of the Respondent are not tenable 19. The Respondent has argued that computation methodology followed by the DGAP does not reflect the true result. The DGAP has computed the profiteered amount by comparing the ITC ratio to the taxable turnover ratios during pre-GST and post-GST perio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ll be passed on to the recipient by way of commensurate reduction in prices." it is clear from a plain reading of the above provision that it mentions "reduction in the rate of tax or benefit of ITC" which means that if any reduction in the rate of tax is effected by the Central or the State Governments or if a registered supplier avails the benefit of additional ITC the same have to be passed on by him to his recipients since both the above benefits are being given by the above Governments out of their tax revenue. Under Section 171 this Authority has only been mandated to ensure that both the benefits of tax reduction and ITC which are the sacrifices of precious tax revenue made from the kitty of the Central and the State Governments are passed on to the end consumers who bear the burden of tax The intent of this provision is the welfare of the consumers who are voiceless, unorganised and vulnerable. This Authority is charged with the responsibility of ensuring that the both the above benefits are passed on to the general public as per the provisions of Section 171 read with Rule 127 and 133 of the CGST Rules. 2017. Hence, the contention of the Respondent is not tenable. Therefor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2012 (282) ELT 33 relied upon by the Respondent has no relevance in this matter. Hence, this Authority finds that the present investigation has been done correctly and has been legally undertaken. 22. Further, the Applicant No. 1 vide his submissions has requested to investigate the Returns of the Respondent as far as GST was concerned and ITC availed by him. In this regard. this Authority finds that the DGAP has considered all facts in his Report. After considering all facts and the submissions of the Respondent, the DGAP has concluded that during the period 01.07.2017 to 31.032018, the Respondent has realized an additional amount of Rs. 6,46.06,227/- which includes both the profiteered amount @8.18% of the taxable amount (base price) and GST on the said profiteered amount from the Applicant No. 1 and 482 other homebuyers. This amount is inclusive of profiteered amount of Rs. 1,62,382/-(including GST) which is profiteered from the Applicant No. 1. 23. It is clear from the plain reading of Section 171 (1) that it deals with two situations one relating to the passing on the benefit of reduction in the rate of tax and the second pertaining to the passing on the benefit of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uyers/recipients on the entire amount profiteered, starting from the date from which the above amount was profiteered till the date of passing on/ payment, as per the provisions of Rule 133 (3) (b) of the CGST Rules, 2017. 27. The complete list of homebuyers has been attached as Annexure - 'A' with this Order, containing the details of the amount of benefit of ITC to be passed on in respect of the project "Sierra-Vizag" of the Respondent. 28. This Authority also orders that the profiteering amount of Rs. 6.48,06,227/. for the project "Sierra-Vizag" along with the interest @ 18% from the date of receiving of advance from the homebuyer till the date of passing the benefit of ITC shall be paid/passed on by the Respondent within a period of 3 months from the date of this Order failing which it shall be recovered as per the provisions of the CGST Act, 2017. 29. It is further revealed that vide Section 112 of the Finance Act, 2019 specific penalty provisions have been enacted for violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1). Such provisions have come in to force w.e.f. 01.01.2020, by inserting Section 171 (3A). Since, no penalty provisions were in existence between the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on of the said Order is as follows:- "The Order dated 23.03.2020 is restored and in continuation of the subsequent Orders dated 08.03.2021, 27.04.2021 and 23.09.2021, it is directed that the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall stand excluded for the purposes of limitation as may be prescribed under any general of special laws in respect of all judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings." Accordingly this Order having been passed today falls within the limitation prescribed under Rule 133(1) of the CGST Rules, 2017. 33. A copy of this order be sent, free of cast. to the Applicant, the DGAP, the Respondent. Commissioners CGST/SGST Andhra Pradesh, the Principal Secretary (Town and Country Planning), Government of Andhra Pradesh for necessary action. Encl.- Annexure- A (Pages 1 to 11). ============= Document 1 ANNEXURE-A LIST OF HOME BUYERS OF THE PROJECT 'Indiabulls Sierra-Vizag' Amount of ITC to Unit Number be passed on S. No. Customer Name (in Rs.) 1 Ms. Shrutilaya Ayyagari A401 93010 2 Mr. Subba Rao Yamana K1101 22182 3 Mr. S Kamalesh Sreeram Sanjeev A603 95829 4 Mr. Katragadda Bhanu Prasad K....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2 85219 53 Mrs. Aparna Kunisetty A1102 192364 54 Mr. Praveen Buradagunta A1002 89658 55 Mr. Pusapati Venkata Simhadri Vijaya Rama Raju K903 20990 56 Mr. Duddupudi Srinivasarao J402 22208 57 Mr. KVV Satyanarayana J1102 22552 58 Mr. KVV Satyanarayana B1102 102218 59 Dr. Pradyut Waghray A1003 98341 60 Mr. K L Jalandhara Rao J901 22991 61 Mrs. Laxmi Chitturi J701 22991 62 Mr. Lingaraj Rauto K503 21176 63 Mr. Karri Ravindrakumar J802 22991 64 Mr. B NV Sarat J401 22991 65 Mr. K Suryanarayana B802 96358 66 Mr. Narasimha Rao Ponnada B1001 88093 67 Mrs. Panga Venkata Lakshmi K803 20621 68 Mr. Angeswara Rao Gogeneni B1103 103363 69 Mr. Venkata Krishnarao Vuyyuru K1003 20804 70 70 Mrs. Rajamani Ranganathan B1203 105038 71 Mrs. Supraja Challa J301 22991 72 Mrs. V Kiranmai J1001 22552 73 Mr. Soupati Satish 8803 101073 74 Mrs. Amitoz Bakshi B801 85803 75 Mr. KTR Patnaik D903 201748 76 Mrs. Jasti Sreedevi J602 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 122 Mr. MV Mahesh Kumar 1301 208204 123 Mr. Vamsi Krishna Seethamsetty 1401 208204 124 Mr. Shashikant Dubey 1201 203442 125 Mr. Sadhanala Venkata Rajesh J403 20359 126 Mr. Y Sandeep Krishna J303 20185 127 Mr. V NV Mohan Rao C1201 153593 128 Mr. Narasimha Bairagi raju Uppalapati B302 101073 129 Mr. Kolluru V S Sridhar 1902 155863 130 Mr. K Venkateswarlu 11102 155863 131 Mr. Kosana Venkata Ramana K1402 23434 132 Mrs. Kavitha Madhuri Kosuri 11401 226173 133 Mr. Bandela Suresh J1402 24546 134 Mrs. Mantha Subhadra C602 155863 135 . Mr. Mulagada Thrivikrama Rao C501 159241 136 Dr. Kiran kumar Veera Kosuri C1103 200904 137 Mr. Pala Rajasekhar A801 103859 138 Mr. Manmath Raj Nayak C601 150273 139 Mr. Siva Kondaiah Yellapu B1402 105523 140 Mr. Abhishek Agarwalla B103 141 Mr. Navdeep Singh Grewal 1101 142 Mr. Brahmam H Vangipurapu J1101 22946 143 Mr. Karthik Valluri C701 152696 144 Mrs. Padmavati Kodali 61401 161513 145 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Mrs. Ankita Garikena 1303 179433 192 Mr. V V Ram Mohan Rao C403 204038 193 Mr. Mohan Joga Rao Oruganti A802 94836 194 Mr. Kavuru Srinivasa Rao 1403 179124 195 Mr. Chinta Venkata Adinarayana Rao C1403 208160 196 Mr. Kandregula Janakiram A102 197 Mr. Surlaw Appajhi C1501 158284 198 Mr. Ronanki Ramesh J1403 21525 199 Mr. P J Prasad D603 209569 200 Mr. Nagendra Srinivas Pantula J101 . 201 Mrs. Korada Gouthami D803 208830 202 Mr. Mandapati Lakshmipathi Varma K1503 21295 203 Dr. Moka Kishore Kumar A1402 94026 204 Mr. Tippana Gopala Krishna E601 101389 205 Mrs. Sunanda Chitrada H401 166185 206 Mrs. Kalakuri Anjani Lakshmi Santhi Priya 1503 179837 207 Mr. K NVS Surya Ramesh A103 . 208 Mr. S.R.K Paramahamsa C802 157158 209 Mr. Duvvada Jeeviteswara Rao D1203 213314 210 Mr. Duvvada Tara Narayana Pradeep D1003 213314 211 Mr. Mohana Rao Bammidi D703 211458 212 Mrs. Peddi Sridevi D1103 213314 213 Mr. Ibrahim Mohammed K1502 23434 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 173679 260 Mr. Gopichand Bhalaki E403 221703 261 Mr. Suresh Babu Katta E1203 217581 262 Mrs. Surepeddi Sudha Rani H501 155719 263 Ms. Muthyala Sri Sailaja 1801 216956 264 Mrs. Mallidi Mahalakshmi D1401 151963 265 Mr. T.V Narasimha Raju H1401 151963 266 Mr. Muddana Srinivasa Rao JP02 * 267 Mrs. Routhu Neelima H702 268 Mr. Kallepalli Venkata Annaji Rao H1403 162435 161679 Page 5 of 11 269 Mr. Vatapalli Jagdish D1202 166558 270 Mr. Alla Ananda Rao 1103 + 271 Mr. Bhanu Prakash Malla H901 151963 272 Mr. Azmatulla Khan E703 213108 273 Mr. Alok Mazumdar G402 167712 274 Mr. Mudunuri V N Kundan Varma A1001 108299 275 Mr. Komali Raghav K103 . 276 Mr. Suneel Kumar Singh H1002 160374 277 Mr. Pavan Kumar Nandigam D502 160374 278 Mr. Ananda Rao D601 159842 279 Mr. Dhananjay Majhi D401 152170 280 Mr. Potnuru Sai Venkata Santosh Kumar H1001 152495 281 Mr. Bhargav Alahari A701 106662 282 Mr. Rachakonda Srinivas E603 210910 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Mr. Pantula Venkata Naga Bhaskar G702 160374 329 Mr. Panddiri David Raju 6701 137699 330 Mr. Pandiri David Raju G801 137699 331 Mr. Venkateswara Rao Chappa G502 157735 332 Mrs. Veduruparthi Lavanya E103 333 Mr. Vijay Kiran Vinukonda H203 # 334 Mr. Viswanadha Satyanarayana Sarma E1102 135431 335 Mr. Jinaga Sivaprasad E1402 133164 336 Mr. Thonangi Venkata Satya Jagadeep C1402 158477 337 Mr. KVS N Prasad E302 140172 338 Mr. Ram Mohan Inukonda D102 339 Mr. Sri Venkateswara Satyanarayana Raju E202 Nadimpalli 340 Mr. Boddeti Satya Penta Rao E102 341 Mr. M Srinivas H103 . 342 Mrs. Nookala Rekha E203 . 343 Mr. Vanaparathi Appala Raju F41201 139216 344 Mr. K V N Raju G203 * 345 Mr. Ramesh Babu Peri H202 * 346 Mr. Venkata Ramana Bendalam E803 204046 347 Mr. Uma Shankar Pattnaik H201 • 348 Mr. Mohan Rao Javvadi D1402 160374 349 Mr. Suri Babu Kuchimanchi B1401 85844 350 Mr. Nekkanty Vivek A1501 101894 351 Mrs. Mudundi Swati ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Konda F3903 115532 399 Mr. Govada Nireekshana Ratna Kishore G1503 143215 400 Mr. M Jagannadha Rao G303 143108 401 Mr. Kandrakunta Prakash Kumar E1502 136359 402 Mr. Naveen Babu Patnala G1501 136359 403 Mr. Varahabhatla Appala Narasimha Sarma E402 134710 404 Mr. Sreedhar Mandapati F31102 157175 405 Mrs. V V Bhavani F4701 133572 406 Mrs. VV Bhavani F4901 133572 407 Mr. Doddi Narayanakumar E1201 . 408 Mr. A Madhu Babu E1001 134384 409 Mr. Chenna Siva Koteswara Rao F21203 35468 410 Mr. Murali Krishna Devershetty F3502 134676 411 Mr. Dorababu Surla F1503 123083 412 Mrs. Kodukula Sangita F1901 117517 413 Mrs. Kalla Hrudaya E1501 134796 414 Mrs. Gedela Sudha Rani F4501 134305 415 Mr. Addanki Pavan Kumar E501 . 416 Mrs. Yeluri Lakshmi Chaitanya F1601 117517 417 Mrs. Ponamandi Lakshmi G501 135637 418 Mrs. Sunita Jonnalagadda F1903 124139 419 Mr. G Siva Kumar F41501 142514 420 Mrs. Gogu Prithvi Shanthi F31402 130443 421 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....itej Projects Private Limited F2901 35419 467 M/S. Ravitej Projects Private Limited J1501 23151 468 Mrs. T Vijayalakshmi F21003 37244 469 Mr. Ramakrishna Routhu F31401 124677 470 Mr. Venugopala Swami Varanasi F11403 284454 471 Mr. Maradana Ramalingeswara Rao F31403 254729 472 Mr. Rabindra Kumar H1501 302352 473 Mrs. Rapetti Padmavati Rajeshwary F21103 183259 474 Mr. Ponnapalli Bhaskar Ram F41202 298155 475 Mr. Kota Eswara Rao F3P02 â‹… 476 Mrs. Kota Jhansi Rani G703 158593 477 Mr. Manduva Maruthi Prasad F2802 187721 478 Mr. Nagaraju Yerra E701 268493 479 Mr. Adireddi Sateesh F11003 282077 480 Ms. Bongu Bhavana Rao F21503 148608 481 Mr. Gopalarao Thulugu F2701 178111 482 Mr. Grandhi Sudhir F2702 186347 483 Mr. Ramarao P D201 302788 484 Mrs. Neelima Padhy D203 398386 485 Mr. Naraharisetty Gangadhar F21403 187181 486 Mr. Gangeti Ramesh Kumar F2803 188051 487 Mr. Nanduri Sita Rama Rao F2602 186347 Page 9 of 11 488 Mr. ....