9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 405X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs) and hence it is established that there was no rate reduction w.e.f. 01.07.2017 in the case of construction service for low cost affordable houses which the above Applicant has purchased. Hence, no benefit of tax reduction was required to be passed on to him. It is also revealed from the record that during the pre-GST era the Respondent was eligible to avail CENVAT Credit of Service Tax paid on the input services and post GST, the Respondent was eligible to avail the input tax credit of GST paid on all the inputs and input service including the sub-contracts. However, the Respondent has not availed any benefit of CENVAT or ITC in the pre and post GST era and hence, there was no additional benefit available to the Respondent which was to be passed on to his buyers - it is established that the Respondent was not liable to pass on the benefit of ITC to the Applicant No. 1 and thus he has not contravened the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017. There is no merit in the application filed by the Applicant No. 1 - application dismissed. - Case No. 09/2020 - - - Dated:- 2-3-2020 - SH. B.N. SHARMA, CHAIRMAN, SH. J.C. CHAUHAN, TECHNICAL MEMBER, SH. AMAND SHAH, TECHNI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... application revealed that the Applicant No. 1 had booked Flat No.-05, Type-B, 2nd floor, in the Respondent's project Kishalay Abasan , 14/3 Ghoshpara in the pre-GST era. In response to the Notice dated 09.04.2019, the Respondent has submitted his reply vide letters and e-mails dated 08.05.2019 and 27.05.2019 along with the following documents/information:- (a) Copies of GSTR-1 Returns for the period from July, 2017 to March, 2019. (b) Copies of GSTR-3B Returns for the period from July, 2017 to March, 2019. (c) Copies of ST-3 Returns for the period from April, 2016 to June, 2017. (d) Copies of sale agreement/contract with the above Applicant. (e) Copies of Audited Balance Sheets for the FY 2016-17 FY 2017-18. 5. The DGAP has further stated that the Respondent, vide his letter dated 27.05.2019, submitted copy of the sale agreement wherein the Respondent had agreed to sell a flat measuring 950 sq. ft. (super built up area) at the basic sale prices of ₹ 3,000/- per square feet to the Applicant No. 1. The details of payment schedule in respect of the flat purchased by the applicant are furnished in the Table-A below:- Table-A (Amount in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 25.01.2018 (in respect of affordable and low-cost house upto a carpet area of 60 square meters). Thus it was submitted that in the case of construction service the effective rate of tax (@ 4.5%) in the Pre-GST era was lower than the effective rate of tax @ 8% or 12%, in the Post-GST era. 7. The DGAP has further submitted that during the pre-GST era the Respondent was eligible to avail CENVAT Credit of Service Tax paid on the input services. Further, post GST, the Respondent was eligible to avail the input tax credit of GST paid on all the inputs and input service including the sub-contracts. However, on perusal of statutory returns, submitted by the Respondent, for the pre-GST era as well as post-GST era, it was found by the DGAP that the Respondent has not availed of any CENVAT/ITC. The details are as under:- Table- B (Amount in Rs.) Sr. No. Particulars (Pre-GST) 01.04.2016 to 30.06.2017 (Post-GST) 01.07.2017 to 31.12.2018 (1) (2) (3) (4) 1 Cenvat Cred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 12. The above Report was considered by this Authority in its meeting held on 13.09.2019 and it was decided to hear the Applicants on 26.09.2019 which was further adjourned to 22.10.2019 on the Applicant No. 1's request. The Applicant No. 1 on 22.10.2019 informed that that he could not travel from Kolkata to Delhi and the case may be decided on merits. Further, the Respondent vide his letter dated 31.10.2019 submitted that his business operations were very small and GST, being a new concept he was not well conversant with its provisions. 13. We have carefully examined the DGAP's Report and the submissions made by both the Applicants and the Respondent placed on record and find that the following issues are to be settled in the present proceedings:- I. Whether there was any reduction in the rate of tax on construction service w.e.f. 01.07.2017 in respect of the present case? II. Whether there was any increased benefit of ITC w.e.f. 01.07.2017.? III. Whether there was any violation of the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 by not passing on the benefit? 14. It is clear from the perusal of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 127 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
