GST Library

Login | Register

Best GST Library

Contact Us

Subscription Plans

GST News | Updates

GST Calendar

GST Diary

GST Case Laws

GST Case Laws Sitemap

GST Notifications, Circulars, Releases etc.

Act & Rules

Act & Rules (Multi-view)

Act & Rules (E-book)

GST Rates

GST Rates (E-book)

HSN Classification

GST Council Meetings

GST Set-off Calculator

ITC Reversal Calculator

E-invoice Calculator

Inverted Duty Calculator

GSTR-3B Manual

GSTR-9 Manual

GSTR-9C Manual

GST Forms

Full Site Search

E-way Bill

Finance Bill

GST Evasion in India

GST Videos

About Us

Contact Us

Our Services


GST e-books

GST Domains Sale

TaxReply India Pvt Ltd
®
Subscribe Free GST updates on...

Join on twitter

Join GST Group 122

DIRECTOR GENERAL OF ANTI-PROFITEERING, CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS vs. NANI RESORTS AND FLORICULTURE PVT. LTD.
(National Anti Profiteering Authority)

Hon'ble Judges:

B.N.SHARMA
J.C.CHAUHAN
R.BHAGYADEVI
P
E
T
I
T
I
O
N
E
R
R
E
S
P
O
N
D
E
N
T
COUNSEL
Rana Ashok Rajneesh
Gayatri
COUNSEL
Vaibhav Jain
Garima Jain

Petitioner / Applicant

DIRECTOR GENERAL OF ANTI-PROFITEERING, CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS

Respondent NANI RESORTS AND FLORICULTURE PVT. LTD.
Court

NAA (National Anti Profiteering Authority)

Date Oct 21, 2019
Order No.

52/2019

TR Citation 2019 (10) TR 1053
Add to Favorites Add to favorites.
Download Original Order
Print (Full Page)
Print (Judgement Only)

ORDER

1. The present Report dated 22.04.2019, has been received on 23.04.2019 from the Applicant No. 8, i.e. the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after detailed investigation under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. Vide the above report, the DGAP has reported that an application dated 04.06.2018 was filed before the Haryana State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering, under Rule 128 of the CGST Rules, 2017 by Applicant No. 1 alleging profiteering by the Respondent, in respect of purchase of a flat in the Respondent’s project “ROF Aalayas” in Sector-102, Gurgaon, Haryana. The Applicant No. 1 alleged that the Respondent did not pass on the benefit of input tax credit to him by way of commensurate reduction in price at the time of introduction of GST w.e.f. 01.07.2017. Along with the application, the above Applicant submitted copies of the demand letters issued to him by the Respondent. 2. The Haryana State Screening ....
Download Full Judgement :
29
May
S
M
T
W
T
F
S