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

SH. PAWAN KUMAR AND OTHERS vs. M/S. S3 BUILDWELL LLP
(National Anti Profiteering Authority)

Hon'ble Judges:

B.N.SHARMA
J.C.CHAUHAN
AMAND SHAH
P
E
T
I
T
I
O
N
E
R
R
E
S
P
O
N
D
E
N
T
COUNSEL
Na
COUNSEL
Na

Petitioner / Applicant

SH. PAWAN KUMAR AND OTHERS

Respondent M/S. S3 BUILDWELL LLP
Court

NAA (National Anti Profiteering Authority)

Date Aug 27, 2020
Order No.

57/2020

TR Citation 2020 (8) TR 3282
Add to Favorites Add to favorites.
Download Original Order
Print (Full Page)
Print (Judgement Only)

ORDER

1. The brief facts of the present case are that the Applicant No. 72 (here-in-after referred to as the DGAP) vide his Report dated 04.06.2019, furnished to this Authority under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017, had submitted that he had conducted an investigation on the complaints of the Applicant Nos. 1 to 71 and found that the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of input tax credit (ITC) in respect of the flats purchased by them in the project “Floridaa situated at Bhatola, Sec-82, Faridabad, Haryana of the Respondent on introduction of the GST w.e.f. 01.07 2017. as per the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 Vide his above Report the DGAP had also submitted that the Respondent had denied the benefit of ITC to the above Applicants and other buyers amounting to ₹ 2,69,77,661/- pertaining to the period from 01.07.2017 to 31.12.2018 and had thus indulged in profiteering and violation of the provisions of Section 171 ....
Download Full Judgement :
29
May
S
M
T
W
T
F
S