I-T - Practise of I-T Dept in acting contrary to their sworn affidavit should be deprecated, as statement of witnesses were used against assessee without affording cross-examination of those witnesses: HC

I-T - Power of revision cannot be exercised solely because PCIT disagrees with view taken by AO in original assessment order: ITAT

I-T - Once AO has accepted gross sales & license fee reflected by assessee in its ledger account, he cannot deny benefit of payment of License Fee which was reduced from gross sales by assessee: ITAT

GST - Indiabulls project 'Sierra Vizag' - Profiteering of Rs.6,46,06,227/- by not passing ITC benefit - To be paid to homebuyers with interest: NAA

GST - Base prices of admission tickets were increased as a result of which the benefit of reduction in GST rate was not passed to recipients - Profiteering proved: NAA

GST - Respondent is directed to reduce the prices to be realized from buyers of flats commensurate with benefit of ITC received by him: NAA

GST - The profiteered amount shall be refunded by respondent alongwith interest @18% thereon: NAA

Cus - Due to non compliance of Sec 138B of Customs Act, 1962 on the part of Commissiomer, statements of person relied upon to fasten penalties upon appellant are not admissible as evidence: CESTAT

ST - Extended time limit can be invoked only if there is a positive act on part of an assessee to conceal anything from department, no ground has been made out to justify invoking extended time limit: CESTAT

2022-TIOL-44-NAA-GST

MJR Builders Pvt Ltd

GST - Anti Profiteering - The present application arises out of an complaint filed by the applicant against the respondent-company in respect of a residential unit developed by the respondent - The applicant alleged that the respondent did not pass on commensurate benefit of ITC post GST rate reduction - The applicant had later cancelled booking of the flat in the respondent's project, however in course of investigation, the DGAP held that the respondent had availed ITC regardless of cancellation of booking and so was liable to pass on commensurate benefit.

Held - The Authority finds no reason to differ from the profiteering amount computed by the DGAP in its report or the methodology adopted therein - The profiteering amount of Rs 1.08 crores is upheld - The respondent is directed to reduce the price of the flats realised from the customers commensurate with the benefit of ITC received - The respondent is also liable to pay 18% interest on the profiteering amount computed by the DGAP - The respondent denied ITC in contravention with the provisions of Section 171(1) and so committed an offence u/s 171(3A) of the CGST Act - The respondent also may not have passed on commensurate benefit of ITC in respect of the other projects being developed - Hence the DGAP is directed to investigate the other projects as well - Compliance with this order be monitored by the Commissioner concerned: NAA

- Application disposed of: NAPA

2022-TIOL-42-NAA-GST

Prescon Realtors And Infrastructure Pvt Ltd

GST - Anti Profiteering - The present application arises out of an complaint filed by the applicant against the respondent-company in respect of a residential unit developed by the respondent - The applicant alleged that the respondent did not pass on commensurate benefit of ITC post GST rate reduction - The applicant had later cancelled booking of the flat in the respondent's project, however in course of investigation, the DGAP held that the respondent had availed ITC regardless of cancellation of booking and so was liable to pass on commensurate benefit.

Held - The Authority finds no reason to differ from the profiteering amount computed by the DGAP in its report or the methodology adopted therein - The profiteering amount of Rs 3.45 crores is upheld - The respondent is directed to reduce the price of the flats realised from the customers commensurate with the benefit of ITC received - The respondent is also liable to pay 18% interest on the profiteering amount computed by the DGAP - The respondent denied ITC in contravention with the provisions of Section 171(1) and so committed an offence u/s 171(3A) of the CGST Act - The respondent also may not have passed on commensurate benefit of ITC in respect of the other projects being developed - Hence the DGAP is directed to investigate the other projects as well - Compliance with this order be monitored by the Commissioner concerned: NAA

- Application disposed of: NAPA

2022-TIOL-40-NAA-GST

Himalaya Real Estate Pvt Ltd

GST - Applicant had alleged that Respondent had not passed on benefit of input tax credit to him by way of commensurate reduction in price in terms of Section 171 of CGST Act, 2017 - The Authority finds that respondent has profiteered by an amount of Rs 2,26,76,700/- during period 1.7.2017 to 31.12.2018 - Said amount shall be refunded by him alongwith interest @18% thereon - This Authority under Rule 133 (3) (a) of CGST Rules, 2017 orders that Respondent shall reduce the prices to be realized from buyers of units commensurate with benefit of ITC received by him - Respondent is directed to pass on interest @ 18% to homebuyers on entire amount profiteered - Concerned jurisdictional Commissioner CGST/SGST are directed to ensure compliance of order - An advertisement of appropriate size to be visible to public may also be published in minimum of two local Newspapers/vernacular press in Hindi/English/local language with the details i.e. Name of builder (Respondent)- M/S Himalaya Real Estate Pvt Ltd., Project- "Himalaya Pride", Location- Greater Noida West, Uttar Pradesh and amount of profiteering so that the concerned homebuyers can claim the benefit of ITC if not passed on - Homebuyers may also be informed that detailed NAA Order is available on Authority's website www.naa.gov.in. - Contact details of concemed Jurisdictional CGST/SGST Commissioner may also be advertised through the said advertisement - Penalty prescribed under Section 171 (3A) cannot be imposed on Respondent respectively - A report in compliance of this Order shall be submitted to this Authority and DGAP, by the Commissioners CGST /SGST within a period of 4 months - This Order having been passed today falls within the limitation prescribed under Rule 133(1) of CGST Rules, 2017: NAA

- Application disposed of: NAPA

2022-TIOL-36-NAA-GST

Shriram Properties Pvt Ltd

GST - Applicant had alleged that Respondent had not passed on benefit of input tax credit to him by way of commensurate reduction in price of unit purchased from respondent on introduction of GST w.e.f. 1.7.2017 in terms of Section 171 of CGST Act, 2017 - The Authority finds that Respondent has profiteered by an amount of Rs 20,57,207 during the period from 01.07.2017 to 30.04.2020 - Said amount shall be refunded by him alongwith interest @18% thereon - This Authority under Rule 133 (3) (a) of CGST Rules, 2017 orders that Respondent shall reduce the prices to be realized from buyers of flats commensurate with benefit of ITC received by him - Respondent is liable for imposition of penalty for period 1.1.2020 to 30.4.2020 - Concerned jurisdictional Commissioner CGST/SGST are directed to ensure compliance of order - An advertisement of appropriate size to be visible to public may also be published in minimum of two local Newspapers/vernacular press in Hindi/English/local language with the details i.e. Name of builder (Respondent)- M/S Shriram Properties Pvt Ltd., Project- "Shriram Summit", Location- Golahalli Electronic city, Bangalore and amount of profiteering so that the concerned homebuyers can claim the benefit of ITC if not passed on - Homebuyers may also be informed that detailed NAA Order is available on Authority's website www.naa.gov.in. - Contact details of concemed Jurisdictional CGST/SGST Commissioner may also be advertised through the said advertisement - A report in compliance of this Order shall be submitted to this Authority and DGAP, by the Commissioners CGST /SGST within a period of 4 months - This Order having been passed today falls within the limitation prescribed under Rule 133(1) of CGST Rules, 2017: NAA

- Application disposed of: NAPA

2022-TIOL-33-NAA-GST

NY Cinema LLP

GST - Anti-Profiteering - s.171 of the CGST Act, 2017 - Issue to be examined is whether when the GST rate on ‘services by way of admission to exhibit of cinematograph films where price of admission ticket was above one hundred rupees' were reduced from 28% to 18% and ‘services by way of admission to exhibit of cinematograph films where price of admission ticket was one hundred rupees or less' were reduced from 18% to 12% w.e.f 01.01.2019, the benefit of such reduction in the rate of GST had been passed on by the respondent to the recipients.

Held:  It is evident that the base prices of the admission tickets were indeed increased as a result of which the benefit of reduction in GST rate from 28% to 18% (w.e.f 01.01.2019) was not passed on to the recipients by way of commensurate reduction in prices charged (including lower GST @18%) - The total amount of profiteering covering the period of 01.01.2019 to 29.02.2020 was Rs.2,66,99,340/- - The computation of commensurate reduction in prices is purely a mathematical exercise and it would vary from product to product and hence no fixed mathematical methodology can be prescribed to determine the amount of benefit which a supplier is required to pass on to a recipient or the profiteered amount - One formula, which fits all, cannot be set while determining such a ‘methodology and procedure' as the facts of each case are different - Respondent was only required to maintain the same base prices of the tickets which he was charging before reduction in the rate of tax and then charge GST at the reduced rate of 18% - However, the respondent had increased the base prices and thus he had not passed on the benefit of tax reduction - Profiteering proved - Since the recipients are not identifiable, the respondent is directed to deposit the amount of profiteering of Rs.1,33,49,670/- in the Central Consumer Welfare Fund (CWF) and Rs.88,27,769/- in the Uttar Pradesh State CWF, Rs.45,21,139/- in the Gujarat State CWF and Rs.762/- in the Punjab State CWF respectively, as per the provisions of rule 133(3)(c) of the CGST Rules, 2017, along with 18% interest - The above amount is to be deposited within a period of 3 months failing which the same shall be recovered by the Commissioner CGST/SGST - Since the respondent has resorted to profiteering, they have committed an offence u/s 171(3A) of the Act, 2017 and are liable for imposition of penalty for the period 01.01.2020 to 29.02.2020 - Accordingly, a notice is to be issued - Since the profiteering for the period post February 2020 has not been examined and calculated, DGAP is directed to compute the same - In view of the apex court decision dated 10.01.2022 the period of limitation has been extended, therefore, the order being passed now by the Authority is within the limitation period prescribed under rule 133(1) of the Rules, 2017: NAA

- Application disposed of: NAPA

2022-TIOL-28-NAA-GST

Indiabulls Real Estate Ltd

GST - Anti-Profiteering - s.171 of the Act, 2017 - Allegation is that the respondent has not passed on the benefit of ITC by way of commensurate reduction in price of the flat purchased by applicant  in the respondent no. 1's project Project Sierra Vizag.

Held: It is established that the respondent has benefited from the additional ITC to the extent of 8.18% of the turnover during the period 01.07.2017 to 31.03.2019 amounting to Rs.6,46,06,227/- - Authority under rule 133(3)(a) of the Rules, 2017 orders that the respondent shall reduce the prices to be realised from the home buyers commensurate with the benefit of ITC received along with interest @18% - Authority directs the respondent to comply with this order within a period of three months - Penalty cannot be imposed u/s 171(3A) retrospectively since the section has come into force w.e.f 01.01.2020 - An advertisement of appropriate size should also be published in minimum of two local newspapers/vernacular press with details of the supplier and amount of profiteering so that the homebuyers concerned can claim the benefit of ITC/interest which is not passed on to them -  In view of the apex court decision dated 10.01.2022, the period of limitation has been extended, therefore, the order being passed now by the Authority is within the limitation period prescribed under rule 133(1) of the Rules, 2017: NAA

- Application disposed of: NAPA