TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (2) TMI 1146
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Tax Credit to him by way of commensurate reduction in the price on purchase of Unit No. A1-801 in the Respondent's project "F-Residences" on introduction of GST w.e.f. 01.07.2017, in terms of Section 171 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. 3. DGAP investigated the matter and submitted investigation report dated 10.11.2021, however, CCI vide letter F. No. M/AP/28/Meeting/2023-24Sectt./263-305 dated 20.03.2024 remanded back the case to DGAP for re-investigation in terms of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi judgement dated 29.01.2024. 4. Further, DGAP after detail investigation submitted fresh Report on 03.06.2025 wherein its findings are briefly summarised as under: 4.1 It is observed that prior to 01.07.2017, i.e. before introduction of the GST, the Respondent was eligible to avail credit of Service Tax paid on the Input Services (CENVAT credit of Central Excise duty was not available) in respect of the units for the project "F Residences" sold by them. 4.2 Since, in post-GST regime, the Respondent was eligible to avail input tax credit of GST paid on all the inputs and input services as they had not opted for new scheme, hence profiteering had to be ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ate are also outside the investigation which is explained as follows: The Respondent vide e-mail dated 10.01.2025 claimed that the benefit of ITC has already been passed to the homebuyers who booked in Post-GST period and Respondent submitted agreement copies of all the homebuyers as documentary evidence in support of his claim. Further, the agreement submitted by the Respondent contains a clause vide para 22 at page no. 11, which specifically mentions the passing on of benefit to the home buyer which is reproduced below as under: "However it is also clarified and agreed that the benefit of input tax credit of GST already considered in the above said consideration value and pass on to the said Purchaser/s and henceforth the Purchaser will not demand any separate discount/set off or claim against the GST". Therefore, these 72 units booked after introduction of GST are out of purview of anti-profiteering investigation. Hence the remaining 253 units are booked in pre-GST period and were taken up for investigation by the DGAP. 4.6 Therefore, only 253 units booked in pre-GST era and their area are covered in the present investigation....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rate was 12% for flats. Accordingly, based on the figures contained in table-'A' above, the recalibrated base price and the excess realization (profiteering) during the post-GST period, are tabulated in Table-'B' below. Table-B Amount in Rs. Particulars Post-GST Period (1) A (2) July, 2017 to March, 2020 (3) Ratio of Credit availed to Purchase Value as per Table - A above (%) B 5.08/12.28 Increase in input tax credit availed Post-GST (%) C 7.20 Purchase Value of Goods and Services (Excluding Taxes and Duties) during Post-GST Period D 95,85,54,324 Total Savings on account of additional ITC benefit E = D*C/100 6,89,77,270 Total Area (in Sq. Ft.) of the project F 4,91,617 Total Saving Per Sq. Ft. G = E/F 140.31 Total Sold Area in pre-GST period (in Sq. Ft.) H 3,31,468 Profiteered Amount (in Rs.) I = G * H 4,65,07,296 5.3 From the Table-'B' above, it is clear that the additional input tax credit of 7.20 % of the purchase value 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 Se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....10.2025. The Respondent and Applicant were given another opportunities to file the written submissions and the hearing was fixed for 02.12.2025. 7. On 02.12.2025, the case was heard, however, none was present on behalf of the Respondent and the Applicant. Since, both Respondents and Applicant have not filed any written submissions, another opportunity was given to both Respondent and Applicant to submit their written submissions and the case was listed for hearing on 09.01.2026. 8. On 09.01.2026 neither Respondent nor Applicant appeared. Further no reply was received from them. Keeping in view the Principles of Natural Justice, the Respondent and Applicant were given another opportunity to file their written submission and the case was listed for hearing on 20.02.2026. 9. The case was heard on 20.02.2026, Shri Devesh Navsalkar, Chartered Accountant, was present on behalf of the Respondent and no one appeared on behalf of the Applicant. Learned Chartered Accountant informed that they had submitted a written reply dated 22.01.2026 wherein they have submitted that: a) They have carefully perused and reviewed the findings and computations detailed in the aforemention....