2026 (8) TMI 1292

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rs passed by the National Antiprofiteering Authority (now GSTAT) (Respondent No. 2). The Petitioner has also challenged the constitutional validity of Section 171 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Rules 122, 124, 126, 127, 129, 133 and 134 of the Central Good and Services Tax Rules, 2017. Further, challenge has also been made to the valuation mechanism adopted by the Respondent No. 2 to determine the alleged profiteering amount by the Petitioner. 3. Mr. Vishal Agarwal, learned counsel for the Petitioner states that upon the introduction of the GST regime, a large number of Writ Petitions were filed before various High Courts across the country challenging the vires of Section 171 of the Central Goods and Services Ta....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ering Authority/DGAP for determination of profiteering in the real estate sector was flawed and required reconsideration. The relevant portion of the Order of the Delhi High Court is extracted hereinbelow: "129. However, this Court finds that the methodology adopted by NAA and DGAP to arrive at the profiteering amount of the real estate industry was generally based on the difference between the ratio of Input Tax Credit to turnover under the pre-Goods and Services and Tax and post-Goods and Services and Tax period. This Court is in agreement with the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners representing the real estate companies that the methodology adopted by NAA is flawed as in the real estate sector, there is no dir....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ers for reconsideration in accordance with its Order dated 29/01/2024. The relevant portion of the Order dated 25/04/2024 is extracted hereinbelow : "2. Mr. Zoheb Hossain, learned counsel for the Union of India states that as the Competition Commission of India (erstwhile National Anti Profiteering Authority) has not challenged paragraph 129 of the said judgment, the Respondents have no objection to remand of the aforesaid real estate company matters. 9. Consequently, the above eight (8) matters are remanded to the Competition Commission of India for a determination/decision in accordance with the judgment and order dated 29th January, 2024 passed by this Court." 8. In relation to the vires of Section 171 of the Central....