The Competition Commission of India (CCI), cleared profiteering charges against M/s JKG Construction Pvt Ltd, as profiteering of JKG Palm Court Project corroborated by evidence from UP Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA).
The Report has been received from the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after an investigation as per the directions passed under Rule 133(5) of the Central Goods and Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017 by the National Anti-profiteering Authority (NAA) in the case of M/s JKG Construction Pvt Ltd. (Respondent) in respect of the projects other than ‘JKG Palm Court’.
The investigation was ordered from a previous profiteering amount of Rs. 5,14,06,920/- that was confirmed by the NAA, leading to concerns that other projects could also be affected. In order to verify Respondent’s claim that he had not undertaken any project other than “JKG Palm Court”, the details of Respondent’s projects registered with UP Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) were checked online by the DGAP and it was observed that the Respondent has taken RERA registration of 2 phases covering Towers A, B, C & D under the JKG Palm Court Both the phases had already been covered under the NAA’s Order.
Further, the DGAP had sent a letter to the Commissioner of State Tax, Lucknow for ascertaining whether the Respondent had executed any projects other than the project “JKG Palm Court”. In response, the Joint Commissioner (Anti-profiteering) State Tax, Lucknow intimated that the Respondent was not executing any project other than the project “JKG Palm Court”.
Hence the investigation concluded that JKG Construction Pvt. Ltd. had not undertaken any other project beyond ‘JKG Palm Court’. This conclusion was supported by data from the UP Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) and the Commissioner of State Tax, Lucknow.
The Coram comprising of Ravneet Kaur, Chairperson, Sangeeta Verma, Technical Member and Bhagwant Singh Bishnoi, Member, observed that “In view of above facts, the Commission finds that the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 are not attracted in the case of the other projects of the Respondent and therefore the proceedings are accordingly dropped against the Respondent.”
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
