TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 1480
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "Maruti Tower" situated at Malad (West), Mumbai-400064. The Applicant had alleged that the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of Input Tax Credit by way of commensurate reduction in prices upon implementation of GST w.e.f. 01.07.2017, in contravention of the provisions of Section 171 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Applicant had also requested that his identity be kept confidential. 2. The aforesaid application was examined by the Standing Committee on Anti-Profiteering and the same was forwarded to the DGAP to conduct a detailed investigation in the matter under Rule 129 of the Rules. 3. Accordingly, the investigation in the matter was concluded and the Investigation Report dated 24.03.2022 was prepared and submitted to the erstwhile National Anti- Profiteering Agency (hereinafter referred to as "NAA") under Rule 129(6) of the Rules. 4. The aforesaid report was pending for orders before the erstwhile NAA (and then before the Competition Commission of India). Meanwhile, in the case of Writ Petition No. 7743/2019 and other connected matters, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi vide its judgment dated 29.01.2024 gave its findings on the methodology to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ulars Total (pre-GST period upto 30.06.2017) Total (post-GST period from 01.07.2017 to 31.03.2019) 1. CENVAT of Service Tax Paid on Input Services (A) 11,83,447 - 2. Input Tax Credit of VAT Paid on Purchase for Inputs (b) - - 3. Input Tax Credit of GST Availed as per GSTR3B returns (C) - 62,94,879 4. Total CENVAT/ITC of VAT/ITC of GST (D = A+B+C) 11,83,447 62,94,879 5. Total Purchase value of goods and services for the project (E) 84,71,307 3,56,83,328 6. Percentage/ Ratio of the input tax credit to the purchase value (F = D*100/E) 13.97% 17.64% From the above Table-A, it is evident that the input tax credit as a percentage of the purchase value has increased from 13.97% in the pre-GST period to 17.64% in the post-GST period, resulting in an additional benefit of 3.67% to the Respondent. 8.6. It is further observed that the Central Government had levied GST @ 18% (effective rate 12% after 1/3rd abatement towards land value) on construction services. Accordingly, the Respondent was liable to pay GST @ 12% with ITC and, therefore, the additional ITC benefit was required to be passed on to the homebuye....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as under: Sr. No. Particulars Pre- GST Period Post- GST Period 1. Purchase Value of Goods and Services (Excluding Taxes and Duties) 84,71,307 3,56,83,328 2. Credit of Service Tax availed 11,83,447 - 3. Credit of VAT availed - - 4. Total Credit availed in Pre- GST Period 11,83,447 - 5. ITC of GST Availed - 62,94,879 6. Reversal of ITC of GST - 5,26,200 7. Net ITC of GST utilized (Sl. 5 - Sl. 6) - 57,68,679 8. Ratio of Credit Availed to Purchase Value (in %) 13.97% 16.17% Difference 2.2 9.3. From the above Table-A, it was observed that the input tax credit as a percentage of the purchase value increased from 13.97% in the pre-GST period to 16.17% in the post-GST period, resulting in an additional ITC benefit of 2.2% to the Respondent. The DGAP further stated that the Respondent was liable to pay GST @ 12% with ITC and, therefore, the additional ITC benefit was required to be passed on to the homebuyers. 9.4. On the basis of the above findings, the DGAP computed the amount of profiteering by applying the additional ITC benefit of 2.2% on the pos....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... S.No. Name of the Buyer Flat number Area of the flat of the buyers In Square Feet Savings per Sq. Ft. Profiteered amount (including GST @ 12%) Amount Receivable as per Books (Rs) Less: Profiteering Amount Payable as per DGAP Report (Rs.) Net amount recievable/ payable 1. Mr. Siddharth J Jogi & Mrs. Falguni Siddharth Jogi (Additional area purchase) 202 243 38.08 10,364 8,47,538 10,364 8,37,174 2. MR. PARESH JAMNADAS SHAH & MRS. SUREKHA PARESH SHAH 502 462 0 - - - - 3. Mrs ANITA SANJAY HALPATI & Mr. SANJAY BHIKUBHAI HALPATI 602 462 38.08 19,704 - - -19,704 4. Mrs. Nisha S Agrawal & Mr. Ashish S Agrawal 703 712.79 38.08 30,400 - - -30,400 5. MR. Ashish Vaghani & Mr. Mahesh Lal Vaghani 801 462.5 38.08 19,725 - - -19,725 6. Mrs. Kalpana Shetye & Mr. Rajan Shetye (Additional Area Purchase) 802 191.8 38.08 8,180 - - -8,180 7. Mr. Pranav Ravishankar Mishra & Mrs. Reena Pranav Mishra & Mr. Prashant Ravishankar Mishra & Mrs. Pratibha Prashant Mishra 803 697.75 38.08 29,759 - - -2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Rs. 28,161/-, aggregating to Rs. 2,62,832/-. 13. We find that the aforesaid revision in computation has been made by the DGAP after duly taking into consideration the reversal of the unutilised ITC of Rs. 5,26,200/- by the Respondent. We further find that the methodology adopted and the figures arrived at in the revised computation are in accordance with the facts and material available on record. Accordingly, we accept the DGAP's Clarification dated 12.08.2026 and the revised computation contained therein. 14. We further note that the Respondent, during the hearing held on 03.09.2026, accepted the revised computation and submitted that the benefit determined therein would be passed on to the eligible homebuyers. The Respondent thereafter furnished, vide submissions dated 09.09.2026, the flat-wise computation/reconciliation indicating the amount attributable to each recipient after giving effect to the revised profiteering computation. On examination, we find that the Respondent has reconciled the revised profiteering amount of Rs. 2,34,671/-, together with applicable GST of Rs. 28,161/-, aggregating to Rs. 2,62,832/-, amongst the respective recipients in accordance with the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....within thirty days of the date of passing of the order by the Authority. Explanation. - For the purposes of this section, the expression profiteered" shall mean the amount determined on account of not passing the benefit of reduction in rate of tax on supply of goods or services or both or the benefit of input tax credit to the recipient by way of commensurate reduction in the price of the goods or services or both." 16. Section 171(1) thus requires the benefit of input tax credit to be passed on to the recipient by way of commensurate reduction in prices. The present proceedings concern the determination of the benefit attributable to the Respondent during the relevant period and the consequent amount required to be passed on to the eligible recipients. 17. The provisions governing the return of the amount not passed on, together with interest, are contained in Rule 133(3)(b) of the CGST Rules, 2017. The provision, as relied upon in the present proceedings, reads as follows: Rule 133(3)(b) - return to the recipient, an amount equivalent to the amount not passed on by way of commensurate reduction in prices along with the interest at the rate of eighteen per....