The Competition Commission of India (CCI) quashed anti-profiteering proceedings against Maheshwari Infratech Pvt Ltd, after conducting an investigation based on a direction from the National Anti-profiteering Authority (NAA) and found that no other projects were executed by the company except the project “U-Faria,” which was already subject to profiteering determination by the NAA.
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 Rules (CGST), 2017 by the National Anti-profiteering Authority (NM) on the investigation report of the DGAP in the case of Mis Maheshwari Infratech Pvt Ltd (Respondent) in respect of the projects other than the `U-Faria.
In order to verify Respondent’s claim that he had not undertaken any project other than “U-Faria”, the details of Respondent’s projects registered with UP Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) were checked online from the UP RERA website and it was observed that the Respondent has executed only U-Faria project which has already been covered under the NAA’s order.
Further DGAP sent a letter to the Commissioner of State Tax, Lucknow for ascertaining whether Respondent has executed any projects other than project “UFaria” In response, the Joint Commissioner (Anti-profiteering) State Tax, Lucknow intimated that the Respondent was not executing any project other than the project ‘`UFaria”.
Based on the findings of the DGAP and on verification from the UP RERA website and State Tax Commissioner, the CCI dropped the anti-profiteering proceedings against Maheshwari Infratech Pvt Ltd and the company was found to have executed only the “U-Faria” project, and the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017, which require passing on the benefit of input tax credit to recipients, were not applicable in this case.
A Three Member Bench comprising 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
