TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 275
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ject "Vertex Panache", on the introduction of GST w.e.f. 01.07.2017, thereby contravening the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act. 3. The Standing Committee on Anti-Profiteering, upon being prima facie satisfied that there was a contravention, forwarded the matter to the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (hereinafter referred to as "the DGAP") for investigation. 4. The DGAP conducted a detailed investigation and submitted its Report dated 27.08.2025 under Rule 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as "the CGST Rules"). The said report concluded that the Respondent had profiteered an amount of Rs. 73,00,010/-(Rupees Seventy-Three Lakhs and Ten Only), comprising a base profiteered amount of Rs. 65,17,866/- and GST @12% amounting to Rs. 7,82,144/-, which was required to be passed on to 140 eligible homebuyers. 5. The matter was subsequently listed before this Tribunal. Vide order dated 29.10.2025, the Tribunal issued notice to the Respondent with a copy of the investigation report dated 27.08.2025 and directed it to file its written submissions. Subsequently, the Respondent sought and was granted multiple extensions for filin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the increase in input costs substantially offset the additional benefit arising on account of the availability of ITC under GST. 6.5 In support of their claim, the Respondent relied upon the findings of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Reckitt Benckiser India Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India, (2024) 14 Centax 374 (Delhi). Specifically, it placed reliance on paragraph 118 of the said judgment, which is reproduced below: "118. This Court is of the view that the manufacturer/supplier despite reduction on rate of tax or benefit of Input Tax Credits can raise the prices based on commercial factors, as long as the same is not a pretense. During the hearing, Mr. Zoheb Hossain, learned counsel, conceded (as recorded earlier) that in some cases, commercial factors might necessitate an increase in price despite reduction in rate of tax or increase in availability of benefit of Input Tax Credits." 6.6 To further substantiate their claim of cost escalation, the Respondent placed on record a Chartered Accountant's Certificate dated 25.06.2026 from M/s Tukaram & Co. LLP. The certificate certified that the additional expenditure of Rs. 3,49,87,499/- attrib....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed post-GST (%) 5.38 3. Purchase Value of Goods and Services (Excluding Taxes and Duties) during Post-GST Period 45,91,09,633 4. Total Savings on account of additional ITC benefit 2,47,02,175 5. Cost Escalation 3,49,87,499 6. Net Savings on account of additional ITC benefit after subtraction of Cost Escalation -1,02,85,324 7. Profiteered Amount (in Rs.) 0 7.3 Based on the revised computation, the DGAP concluded that after subtracting the cost escalation, the total savings of the Respondent was in a negative figure. The DGAP, therefore, submitted that 'Nil' profiteering had been calculated for the project "Vertex Panache". 8. Subsequently, the Respondent also filed a letter dated 19.08.2026 before this Tribunal in response to the DGAP clarification dated 30.07.2026, accepting the DGAP's findings and revised computation, and confirming that it had no objection to the same being taken on record in the ongoing proceedings. 9. The matter was taken up for hearing by this Tribunal on 10.07.2025, 12.08.2025, 19.08.2025, 23.09.2025, 29.10.2025, 06.01.2026, 24.03.2026, 12.05.2026, 21.07.2026 and 20.08.2026. The Author....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rrun to the increase in prices of RMC, Sand, and Bricks. 11.4 The claim is supported by an independent Chartered Accountant's Certificate dated 25.06.2026 from M/s Tukaram & Co. LLP, which certifies that the additional expenditure of Rs. 3,49,87,499/- has been computed in accordance with the methodology set out in Annexure-I to their submission, based on the books of account, cost records, and purchase records maintained by the Company. The DGAP, in its clarification dated 30.07.2026, has accepted this certificate and the underlying claim after verifying the same with sample invoices provided by the Respondent. 11.5 The Respondent has invoked the principle that price increases based on genuine commercial factors, such as cost escalation, do not constitute profiteering. This principle finds resonance in the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Reckitt Benckiser India Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (supra). This Tribunal observes that paragraph 118 of the said judgment provides clear and authoritative guidance on this aspect. The relevant extract from paragraph 118 is reproduced as under: "118. This Court is of the view that the manufacturer/sup....