9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (8) TMI 602X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017. Penalty - HELD THAT:- It is also revealed from the perusal of the CGST Act and the Rules framed under it that no penalty had been prescribed for violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the above Act, therefore, the Respondent was issued show cause notice to state why penalty should not be imposed on him for violation of the above provisions as per Section 122 (1) (i) of the above Act as he had apparently issued incorrect or false invoices while charging excess consideration and GST from the buyers. However. from the perusal of Section 122 (1) (i) of the CGST Act, 2017, it is clear that the violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1) is not covered under Section 122 (1) (i) of the CGST ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vices Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. had submitted that he had conducted an investigation on the complaint of the Applicant No. 1 and found that the Respondent had not passed on to his recipients, the benefit of reduction in the rate of tax of GST w.e.f. 15.11.2017 from 28% to 18% in respect of his supplies of luggage trolley bag/suitcases , namely Tropic 45 Weekender Black and Neolite Strolly 53 360 (VIP) FIR (hereinafter referred to as the products ), as per the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017. Vide his above Report the DGAP had also submitted that the Respondent had denied the benefit of GST rate reduction to his recipients amounting to ₹ 18,887/-, pertaining to the period w.e.f. 15.11.2017 to 31.08.2018 and had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed on him. 5. The Respondent vide his submissions dated 25.09.2019 has stated that the penal provisions under Section 122 of the Act read with Rule 133 (3) (d) of the CGST Rules, 2017 should not be invoked and penalty should not be imposed on him as he had accepted and paid alongwith applicable interest thereon the amounts which had been determined by this Authority. He has also submitted proof of payment of the profiteered amount in the Central Consumer Welfare Fund and the Kerala State Consumer Welfare Fund as directed by the Authority vide its Order No. 31/2019 dated 10.05.2019 = 2019 (5) TMI 783 - NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY which has been confirmed by the DGAP. He has also interalia made a number of submissions for no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rovide penalty for not passing on the benefits of tax reduction and ITC and hence the penalty prescribed under Section 122 cannot be imposed for violation of the anti-profiteering provisions made under Section 171 of the above Act. 8. It is further revealed that vide Section 112 of the Finance Act; 2019 specific penalty provisions have been added for violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1) which have come in to force w.e.f. 01 01.2020. by inserting Section 171 (3A). 9. Since. no penalty provisions were in existence between the period w.e.f. 15.11.2017 to 31.08,2018 when the Respondent had violated the provisions of Section 171 (1), the penalty prescribed under Section 171 (3A) can not be imposed on the Respondent retrospectivel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
