2026 (1) TMI 1498

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n purchase of said flat on introduction of GST w.e.f. 01.07.2017. 2. On the basis of above complaint, the matter was examined by the Standing Committee and the same was referred to the Director General of Anti-profiteering, hereinafter DGAP. Detailed investigation was conducted by the DGAP in the light of the observations made by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the Judgement in Reckitt Benckiser India Pvt. Ltd Vs. Union of India (2024) 14 Centex 374. 3. The Respondent provided some relevant documents for investigation to DGAP which are duly considered. 4. The DGAP, in its Report, mentioned that the project had two phases such as phase-I and phase-II respectively. Phase-I started in the month of March 2015 and got completed in August....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri Rajiv Kumar Aggarwal. He filed his objections against the report of DGAP to the effect that; - (a) That at the time of booking the respondent confirmed that the benefit of input tax credit would be passed to him. (b) There is inconsistency in project definition. Earlier the DGAP identified the profiteering of approx. Rs 2.32 lakh but in the revised report the amount of profiteering reduced to zero. (c) If the complainant was not entitled to any benefit of ITC since he booked the flat in January 2018, the builder would not have send a subsequent e-mail making a promise to pass benefit of ITC to him (d) The home buyers are entitled for ITC benefit regardless to the fact that they booked flat before or....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....efore Competitive Commission of India, hereinafter CCI, the erstwhile authority. The CCI vide its letter dated 20.03.2024 directed the DGAP for re-investigation of this matter under rule 129 of the CGST Rules, 2017. As per the Judgement passed by Hon'ble High Court, Delhi, no fixed/ uniform method or mathematical formula can be laid down for determining profiteering. The Hon'ble High Court in para 128 of the Judgement, laid down certain guidelines for computation of profiteering. 14. The Hon'ble High Court Delhi in Reckitt Benckiser India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (supra) in para 128 laid down certain guidelines for computation of profiteering such as; - "128. There is no dispute with regard to the methodology to be adopted i....