9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (11) TMI 717 - HC - GSTProfiteering - Section 171 of CGST Act and Chapter XV of the CGST Rules, specifically Rules 126, 127 and 133 of CGST Rules - HELD THAT - Petitioner is directed to deposit the principal profiteered amount i.e. ₹ 58,43,170/- with Central Consumer Welfare Fund within three months. The interest amount as well as the penalty proceedings and further investigation with regard to other outlets are stayed till further orders. List the matter on 07th December, 2020.
Issues:
Challenge to final order of National Anti-profiteering Authority (NAPA) | Constitutionality of Section 171 of CGST Act and Chapter XV of CGST Rules | Constitutionality of NAPA's composition | Quashing of detailed Guidelines issued by NAPA Analysis: The petition challenges the final order of the National Anti-profiteering Authority (NAPA) dated 17th August, 2020, alleging profiteering of a specific amount during a defined period, along with consequential directions. The petitioner seeks a declaration that Section 171 of the CGST Act and specific rules are unconstitutional, in addition to challenging the composition of NAPA as contrary to Supreme Court directions. Furthermore, the petitioner requests the quashing of certain guidelines issued by NAPA, deeming them ultra vires and violative of relevant rules. The petitioner's counsel highlights the alleged profiteered demand, including the GST component, which has already been deposited with the Tax Department. The court issues notice to the respondents, with their respective counsels accepting notice on behalf of each respondent. The court directs the filing of counter-affidavits within two weeks and allows for rejoinder-affidavits before the next hearing date. Additionally, the petitioner is instructed to deposit the principal profiteered amount with the Central Consumer Welfare Fund within a specified timeframe, with a stay on interest, penalty proceedings, and further investigations until further orders. The matter is scheduled for the next hearing on a specific date, with instructions for the order to be uploaded on the website promptly and shared with the counsels via email. The judgment reflects a comprehensive consideration of the challenges raised by the petitioner regarding the NAPA's order, the constitutionality of relevant provisions, and the procedural aspects of the case, ensuring a fair and transparent legal process.
|
