9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 1479X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecords reinvestigate and redetermine the profiteered amount, if any, for the Project and for each eligible recipient of supply in the said Project based upon such authentic and correct data, information and records. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in IN RE : COGNIZANCE FOR EXTENSION OF LIMITATION [ 2020 (5) TMI 418 - SC ORDER ], while taking suo motu cognizance of the situation arising on account of Covid-19 pandemic, has extended the period of limitation prescribed under the general law of limitation or any other special laws (both Central and State) including those prescribed under rule 133(1) of the CGST Rules, 2017 - Accordingly this Order having been passed today falls within the limitation prescribed under rule 133(1) of the CGST Rules, 2017. - Shri Amand Shah, Chairman, Pramod Kumar Singh and Hitesh Shah, Members (T) Rajeev Goyal and Ankush Goel for the Applicant. Rajesh Kumar Jain, AVP, Finance Accounts for the Respondent. ORDER The present Report dated 27-11-2020, has been furnished by the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP), under rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the case are tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the Respondent. 3. The Applicant No. 1 submitted his Affidavit dated 18-5-2022, (received on 24-5-2022), vide which he has alleged fraud and forgery on the part of the Respondent and fault in calculations of the profiteered amount, saleable area of the Project and the total turnover of the Respondent by the DGAP. The said Affidavit is reproduced below:- a. I say that Builder has prima facie indulged into diverging manipulated, wrong, false, cooked up and forged information and documents to the DGAP as is evident from following submissions:- ii. In Table A of Para 18 at Page 9 of the DGAP's Report, total saleable area in the Project has been wrongly claimed to be 12,19,140 Sq. Ft. while actual saleable area as per the declaration made under the RERA is 12,39,814 Sq. Ft. as is evident from details attached herewith as Annexure-1 and the same as per declaration filed under UP Apartment Act is 12,79,980,50 Sq. Ft as is evident from copy of declaration annexed herewith as Annexure-2. iii. Claim of Builder as to passing of GST benefit to all flat owners as per entitlement, as mentioned in Para 22 at page 11 of DGAP's report, is wrong as is evident from the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dit notes before the DGAP to substantiate its false and fabricated claim. However, certain documents in blank were got signed at the time of handover of the possession without supplying the copies thereof at the time of signing which is pending adjudication before the Hon'ble NCDRC, New Delhi. vi. To avoid detection of such fraud. Builder provided wrong email ids to the Authority and/or emails seeking verifications have been sent selectively, as none of flat owners, detailed in Annexure-6 Colly, received any verification email from DGAP. In this regard, email confirmation received from Prateek Edifice Apartments Owner Association is annexed as Annexure-8. vii. Claim of the Builder as to Rs. 50.85 Cr turnover during April, 2016 to June, 2017 is wrong and false, as same was Rs. 531,49 Cr as on 31-3-2016 and Rs. 713.28 Cr as on 31-3-2017 as per audited balance sheet. Thus, turnover even during April, 2016 to March, 2017 was of Rs. 181.49 crore. Against said amount collected, amount spent on the Project as on 31-3-2016 and 31-3-2017 were of Rs. 281.61 (53%) and Rs. 350.70 crore (49%). Copies of balance sheet for the F.Y. 2013-18 are again annexed herewith as Annexure-9 Coll ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s- 5 6 (hereinafter referred to as 'Part-1') was not confidential in nature and the disclosure of such information would not harm the competitive position of the Respondent, accordingly, the same might be disclosed/shared. In this regard, it was pertinent to mention that the non-confidential information was already available on the Government portals and the same was accessible by the general public like MCA Portal. However, the data/information pertaining to Annexures-7 to 14 17 to 19 (hereinafter referred to as 'Part-2') was absolutely confidential as well as personal in nature and there were high chances that the same might be misused by the competitors of the Respondent. 5. The Authority finds that the Applicant No. 1 has alleged fraud and forgery on the part of the Respondent and fault in calculations of the profiteered amount, saleable area and the total turnover of the Respondent by the DGAP for the Project Prateek Edifice . The Applicant No. I vide the said Affidavit has stated that he and his cousin Sh. Vikas Agarwal had simultaneously booked Flat Nos. C-1105 1106 respectively on same date and on identical terms and conditions and for same co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... teered amount in respect of the Applicant Nos. 1 2 and other homebuyers/recipients in the Project Prateek Edifice based upon such records/data/documents as found to be correct and authentic by the DGAP in accordance with law. b. The Applicant No. I vide the said Affidavit has also sworn and stated that in Table 'A' of Para 18 at Page 9 of the DGAP's Report, total saleable area in the Project has been wrongly claimed to be 12,19,140 Sq. Ft., while actual saleable area as per the declaration made under the RERA by the Respondent is 12,39,814 Sq. Ft. The Applicant No. 1 has attached detailed calculation sheet as Annexure-1 to his submissions. Further the Applicant No. 1 has stated that total saleable area in the Project as per declaration filed under the applicable Uttar Pradesh Apartment (Promotion of Construction, Ownership and Maintenance) Act, 2010 was 12,79,980.50 Sq. Ft and submitted a copy of declaration annexed therewith. As the claim/plea of the Applicant No. 1 is based upon the data of other statutory Authorities like RERA or the said UP Apartment (P, C O) Act, 2010 etc. Therefore, the authenticity of the records/documents/data provided by the Responden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
