Home      Free WhatsApp Updates      Services      Subscription Plans
🔒 Login    
Subscription Plans   
Taxreply tweets
GST News
About GST Library
E-Books
Subscription Plans
Offers New
GST Case Laws ✓
GST Notifications / Circulars
GST Act / Rules
GST Act / Rules (Amendments)
GST Rates
Classification (Chapter Wise)
Classification (Search Tool)
GST Set-off Calculator
Full Site Search
National Anti-Profiteering Authority
GST Forms   
E-way Bill
Finance Bill
GST Amendment Statistics
GST Case Laws
3,293 cases mapped to 12,110 taggings
Citation
Court
State
Search by Related Tags
  OR

  OR

  OR
Date (From)
Date (To)
Name of Party
Free-Text Search
Sort By
Text Search option

   165 Results

1. The brief facts of the present case are that the Applicant No. 2 (here-in-after referred to as the DGAP) vide his Report dated 02.04.2019, 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 complaint of the Applicant No. 1 and found that the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of rate reduction when the rate of GST was reduced from 18% to 5% in the foot wear (Shoes). as ...

Sep 10, 2020  

1. The present Report dated 31.01.2020 has been furnished by the Applicant No. 2 i.e. the Director-General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after a detailed investigation in line with Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the present case are that an application dated 22.05.2019 was filed by the Applicant No. 1 against the Respondent alleging profiteering in respect of supply of 'Services by way of admission to exhibition of cinematography f...

Sep 8, 2020  

1. The present Report dated 26.02.2020 has been received by this Authority from the Applicant No. 2, i.e. the Director-General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after a detailed investigation in line with Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the present case are that the DGAP has received a reference from the Standing Committee on Anti- Profiteering in respect of an application filed by the Applicant No. 1, under Rule 128 of the CGST Rules, 2017...

Sep 8, 2020  

1. The present Report dated 31.01.2020, has been received from the Applicant No. 3 i.e. the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after a detailed investigation under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the case are that an application was filed before the Karnataka State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering by the Applicant No. 1, alleging profiteering by the Respondent in respect of purchase of Apartment No. Emerald-002, in t...

Aug 31, 2020  

1. The brief facts of the present case are that the Applicant No. 8 (here- in-after referred to as the DGAP) vide his Report dated 22 04 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 7 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 &ldq...

Aug 27, 2020  

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 &ld...

Aug 27, 2020  

1. The brief facts of the present case are that the Applicant No. 2 (here-in-after referred to as the DGAP) vide his Report dated 29.10.2018, 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 complaint of the Applicant No 1 and found that the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of Input Tax Credit (ITC) in respect of the Villa No. B-02 purchased by him in the Respondent...

Aug 27, 2020  

1. The brief facts of the present case are that the Applicant No. 2 (here-in-after referred to as the DGAP) vide his Report dated 24.04.2019, 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 complaint of the Applicant No. 1 and found that the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of Input Tax Credit in respect of the flat purchased by him in the “River View Heights&rd...

Aug 25, 2020  

1. The brief facts of the present case are that the Applicant No. 2 (here-in-after referred to as the DGAP) vide his Report dated 05.07.2018, 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 complaint of the Applicant No. 1 and found that the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of reduction in the rate of GST from 18% to 12% in respect of the product ‘Maggi Noodles ...

Aug 24, 2020  

1. The brief facts of the present case are that the Applicant No. 2 (here-in-after referred to as the DGAP) vide his Report dated 29.03.2019, 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 complaint of the Applicant No. 1 and found that the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of reduction in the rate of GST from 12% to Nil in respect of supply of “Sanitary Napkins...

Aug 24, 2020