9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (11) TMI 233 - HC - GSTProfiteering - petitioner contends that the calculation done by the Director General of Anti-profiteering (DGAP) is factually incorrect as he has calculated the profiteered amount twice - HELD THAT - Issue Notice. The impugned order dated 11th May, 2020 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to NAPA for fresh adjudication in accordance with law. List the matter before NAPA on 18th November, 2020. All the rights and contentions of the parties are left open.
Issues:
Challenge to final order of National Anti-profiteering Authority (NAPA) on profiteering amount calculation. Analysis: The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the final order of NAPA dated 11th May, 2020, alleging that the profiteered amount of ?38,64,891 during the period from 15th November, 2017 to 31st March, 2019 was calculated incorrectly by the Director General of Anti-profiteering (DGAP). The petitioner argued that the profiteered amount was calculated twice, with each invoice being considered twice, as evidenced by Annexure 34. It was also highlighted that the profiteered amount was computed for both the principal company and the petitioner. Upon hearing, the court issued notice to the respondents. The advocates representing the respondents accepted the notice on behalf of their respective clients. Subsequently, it was acknowledged by Mr. Ravi Prakash, on instructions, that there were factual errors in the impugned order. Mr. Prakash expressed no objection to setting aside the order dated 11th May, 2020, and agreed to remand the matter back to NAPA for fresh adjudication. The petitioner's counsel also had no objection to this course of action. With the consent of all parties, the court set aside the impugned order dated 11th May, 2020, and remanded the matter back to NAPA for fresh adjudication in accordance with the law. The next hearing was scheduled before NAPA on 18th November, 2020, and all rights and contentions of the parties were left open. Consequently, the present writ petition and the pending application were disposed of. The court ordered the uploaded of the order on the website immediately and directed the forwarding of a copy of the order to the counsels via email.
|
