9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (8) TMI 1032 - CCI - GSTProfiteering - benefit of ITC was not passed on to the recipients by the Respondent during the period from 01.07.2017 to 31.05.2020 - contravention of provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - The DGAP has furnished his Report dated 03.03.2023 to the Commission, stating that no other projects are being executed by the Respondent and hence the Respondent was not liable to pass on the benefit of Input Tax Credit and Section 171 (1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 requiring that any reduction in the rate of tax on any supply of goods or services or the benefit of the input tax credit shall be passed on to the recipient by way of commensurate reduction in prices , is not applicable in the present case. The above fact has also been corroborated from the website of the UP RERA as well as the reply of the Jurisdictional State GST Commissionerate, Noida as per the report of the DGAP. This Commission finds that the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 are not attracted in the case of other projects of the Respondent and therefore the present proceedings are hereby dropped.
Issues involved:
The issues involved in the legal judgment include profiteering by the Respondent in a construction project, determination of profiteered amount, investigation into profiteering in relation to other projects executed by the Respondent, and applicability of Section 171 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Profiteering in 'ATS Rhapsody' Project: The DGAP's first Investigation Report highlighted that the Respondent had profiteered an amount of Rs. 9,03,74,981 while executing the 'ATS Rhapsody' project, which was required to be passed on to the home-buyers. Determination of Profiteered Amount: The NAA determined the profiteered amount as Rs. 9,03,74,9811- due to the non-passage of the benefit of Input Tax Credit (ITC) to recipients by the Respondent during a specified period, ordering the Respondent to pass on the benefit. Investigation into Other Projects: The NAA directed the DGAP to investigate profiteering in relation to projects other than 'ATS Rhapsody' executed by the Respondent. The DGAP's subsequent report confirmed that no other project had been undertaken by the Respondent, as verified through online checks and responses from tax authorities. Applicability of Section 171 of CGST Act: The Commission considered the DGAP's report, confirming that no other projects were being executed by the Respondent apart from 'ATS Rhapsody'. As a result, it was concluded that Section 171(1) of the CGST Act, 2017, requiring the passing on of tax benefits to recipients, was not applicable in this case. Conclusion: Based on the findings that no other projects were being undertaken by the Respondent, the Commission determined that the provisions of Section 171(1) of the CGST Act, 2017, did not apply to the Respondent's other projects, leading to the dropping of the proceedings. The order was to be sent to the Respondent and the DGAP, with the case file to be closed upon completion.
|
