2023 (3) TMI 371

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ar Rao, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Prateek Chadha, Ms.Mansi Sood, Mr.Vrishank Singhania and Mr.Ruturaj Gurjar, Advocates. Mr.Vrishank Singhania, Advocates. For the  Respondents : Mr. Sushil Kumar Pandey with Mr.Kuldeep Singh, Advocate for UOI. Mr. Zoheb Hossain Advocate with Mr.Vipul Agrawal, Jr.Standing Counsel, Mr. Vivek Gurnani and Ms.Niharika Kuchhal, Advocate for respondents No.2. Mr. Anurag....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... before Allahabad High Court. He states that vide the impugned order, respondent No.2 has erroneously determined that the petitioner has profiteered to the tune of Rs.2,66,99,340/- by not reducing the price of the goods or services supplied by it, in proportion to the tax rate reduction on account of introduction of the new GST rates. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner states that the pe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cannot be applied retrospectively. He states that the impugned order and notice fail to consider relevant materials and rely on irrelevant materials. He further states that the impugned order erroneously applies sub-rule (3) of Rule 133. He points out that the impugned notice has been issued after final impugned order by respondent No.2 and amounts to impermissibly extending the scope of enquiry. ....