Top
Begin typing your search above and press return to search.

Proceedings under 133(5) of CGST Rules Ends with NAA Order which Determines Profiteered Amount: CCI

Proceedings under 133(5) of CGST Rules Ends with NAA Order which Determines Profiteered Amount: CCI
X

The Competition Commission of India(CCI) has held that proceedings under 133(5) of Central Goods and Service Tax (CGST) Rules end with National Anti-profiteering Authority (NAA) order which determines the profiteered amount. A notice under Rule 129 of the CGST Rules, 2017 was issued by the DGAP on 07.09.2022, .calling upon M/s New World Realty, the Respondent to reply as to whether...


The Competition Commission of India(CCI) has held that proceedings under 133(5) of Central Goods and Service Tax (CGST) Rules end with National Anti-profiteering Authority (NAA) order which determines the profiteered amount.

A notice under Rule 129 of the CGST Rules, 2017 was issued by the DGAP on 07.09.2022, .calling upon M/s New World Realty, the Respondent to reply as to whether he admitted that the benefit of ITC had not been passed on to the buyers of the projects other than "Tinsel Town", if any, by way of commensurate reduction in prices and if so, to suo moto determine the quantum thereof and indicate the same in his reply to the notice as well as furnish all the supporting documents.

The DGAP has verified the claim of the Respondent that he had not undertaken any project other than "Tinsel Town”, by checking the details of the projects registered by him with the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA), from its website. Upon verification, it was observed that the Respondent had taken Tower-wise RERA registration of 2 Phases under Tinsel Town project. Further, the NAA has already directed the Respondent to pass on the benefit of ITC in respect of both the phases.

The Commission comprising  Bhagwant Singh Bishnoi, Ravneet Kaur, Jyoti Jindga Bhanot, and Sangeeta Verma observed that “the Respondent is not executing any other project other than the project “Tinsel Town” under the same GSTIN’ 27AAHFN999N1Z3 and the same has been verified by the DGAP by visiting the website of Maharashtra RERA. From the website of Maharashtra RERA, it has been observed that the Respondent has obtained Tower-wise registration of two phases of the project “Tinsel Town” and no other project than the above project is being executed by him under the above GSTIN.”

Further held that “the instant case does not fall under the ambit of Anti-Profiteering provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 as the Respondent is not executing any project other than the project “Tinsel Town” which has already been investigated and the profiteered amount has also been determined by the NAA vide its Order No. 59/2022 dated 22.08.2022.”

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates

Next Story

Related Stories

Advertisement
Advertisement
All Rights Reserved. Copyright @2019