TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (6) TMI 1284
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... mention of this aspect. It had a bearing on the instant proceedings since the DGAP's Report dated 23.03.2020 only covers one of the four blocks i.e. Block 'K'. As the Respondent had obtained four separate RERA registrations for his four blocks/towers, he should had maintained separate escrow/bank accounts. In case the Respondent had not complied with the above-mentioned provision of the RERA Act, 2016, then the entire project "Celebrity Gardens" comprising all his blocks/towers, should be considered as a single project for the computation of profiteering, given that the Respondent had been maintaining a common ITC register/ITC ledger for all the blocks of his said project and had been filing common GST Returns for all the blocks/towers of the said project "Celebrity Gardens; Hence, the compliance of the Respondent with the above-referred provisions of the RERA Act, 2016, becomes paramount and need to be examined. In view of this, there arises the need to revisit the investigation to ascertain if the Respondent had passed on the benefit of ITC to the homebuyers of the other 3 towers/blocks of the impugned project by a commensurate reduction in the prices of the residential unit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cknow-226001 on the introduction of GST w.e.f. 01.07.2017, in terms of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017. The Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering examined the above application in its meeting held on 13.09.2019 and forwarded the same to the DGAP to conduct a detailed investigation in the matter. b) The DGAP has examined the above application, the replies of the Respondent and the documents/evidence on record. The main issues for determination were whether there was the benefit of reduction in the rate of tax or ITC on the supply of construction service after the implementation of GST w.e.f. 01.07.2017 and if so, whether such benefit had been passed on by the Respondent to his recipients by way of commensurate reduction in prices, in terms of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017. c) From the data submitted by the Respondent covering the period April 2016 to September 2019, like the details of the ITC availed by him, the turnovers from the project "Celebrity Garden Block-K", the ratios of ITCs to turnovers during the pre-GST (April 2016 to June 2017) and post-GST (July 2017 to September 2019) periods was calculated, which have been furnished in Table-B below:- T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat during the period 01.07.2017 to 30.09.2019, the benefit of ITC that needed to be passed on by the Respondent to the buyers of flats came to Rs. 1,54,269/- which included 12% GST on the base amount of Rs. 1,37,740/-. e) However, the Authority after considering the various submissions made by the Respondent & the DGAP report, vide its Internal Order No. 34/2020 dated 11.12.2020, referred the matter back to the DGAP and directed to further investigate the present case under Rule 133 (4) of the CGST Rules,2017as per the Paral on pre-page. 3. Accordingly, the DGAP has carried out necessary re-investigation and on conclusion of the same, a report dated 28.01.2020 was sent to the NAA under Rule 133 (4) of the CGST Rules, 2017.The Report dated 28.01.2021, inter-alia contained as under:- a) The Respondent, with reference to para-18 of the Authority Internal Order No. 34/2020 dated 11.10.2020, informed that in pre-GST period from 01.04.2016 to 30.06.2017, there were only three returns of Service tax and total Turnover and Cenvat of the three returns for the period was Rs. 5,79,03,391/- & Rs. 4,31,790/- respectively. The Respondent enclosed the copies of relevant port....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as per Service Tax/GST Returns CENVAT/ITC for the Project-Celebrity Garden J,N,& P Pre-GST from 01.04.2016 to 30.06.2017 2,55,624 4,31,790 1,76,166 Post-GST from 01.07.2017 to 30.09.2019 5,08,131 1,01,62,617 96,54,486 It was observed by DGAP that there were altogether 4 projects of the Respondent and all was separately registered under RERA. The CENVAT/ITC as well as the turnover during the pre-GST/ post-GST period given in the Statutory Returns (Service Tax/GSTR 3B) pertains to all the four Blocks of the project "Celebrity Garden". Therefore, the turnover given in the Returns would not match with the turnover calculated in the Investigation Report dated 23.03.2020 of DGAP as the turnover considered by DGAP pertains to demand raised for the block "K" of the project "Celebrity Garden" only, whereas the Turnover given in the Returns represents all the 4 blocks. Similarly, the CENVAT/ITC taken in the Returns would also not match with Investigation Report dated 23.03.2020. d) The DGAP concluded that there was no change in the amount of profiteering of Rs. 1,54,269/- as was reported in DGAP's Investigation Report dated 23.03.2020. 4. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....passed on ITC benefit amounting to Rs.1,54,269/-(inclusive of GST) to his recipients/homebuyers as required under the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017. The details of the benefit required to be passed on to the eligible homebuyers have been detailed by the DGAP vide Annexure-11 of his Report dated 23.03.2020. 8. Section 171 of the CGST Act provides as under:- "Any reduction in rate of tax on any supply of goods or services or the benefit of ITC shall be passed on to the recipient by way of commensurate reduction in prices." It is clear from the plain reading of Section 171 (1) mentioned above 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 ITC. On the issue of reduction in the tax rate, it is apparent from the DGAP's Report that there has been no reduction in the rate of tax in the post GST period. Hence, the only issue to be examined is as to whether there was any net benefit of ITC with the introduction of GST. The Authority finds that, the ITC, as a percentage of the turnover, that was available to the Respondent d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1,786/- 26 K403 Kavita Dwivedi 1,169/- 27 K404 Rajiv Jaitly 8,600/- 28 K501 Upendra Nath Pradhan 5,680/- 29 K502 Ankur Talwar 0 30 K504 Dilip Kumar Sarkar 29/- 31 K601 Jyoti Singh 1,530/- 32 K602 Priyanka Singh 3,400/- 33 K603 Mithilesh/Satya Swaroop 742/- 34 K604 Nirbhay Kumar Thakur 1,197/- 35 K701 Kanchan Jha 1,360/- 36 K703 Major Himanshu 1,573/- 37 K801 K801 Madhulika Singh 5,906/- 38 K802 K802 Madhulika Singh 765/- 39 K803 Pranshu B Pandey 1,041/- 40 K804 Himanshu Pandey 1,155/- 41 K901 Rajiv Kumar 0 42 K903 K/09/03 Tushar Srivastava 5,522/- 43 K904 Ashok Kumar Singh 8,799/- Total 1,54,269/- 9. In view of the above discussions, the Authority finds and determines that the Respondent has profiteered by an amount of Rs. 1,54,269/- for the project 'Celebrity Garden Block K' during the period of investigation i.e. 01.07.2017 to 30.09.2019. The above amount that has been profiteered by the Respondent from his Home buyers in the a....