Login | Register
GST Library
TaxReply Support
YouTube Videos
Twitter
Buy Premium Tax Domains
About Us
Contact Us
Our Services
TaxReply India Pvt Ltd

RAHUL GAUTAM AND OTHERS vs. HIMALAYA REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD
(National Anti Profiteering Authority)

Hon'ble Judges:

AMAND SHAH
PRAMOD KUMAR SINGH
HITESH SHAH
Pet. Counsel
Himanshu Gautam
Res. Counsel
Balram Sinha

Petitioner / Applicant

RAHUL GAUTAM AND OTHERS
Respondent HIMALAYA REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD
Court

NAA (National Anti Profiteering Authority)

Date Jul 18, 2022
Order No.

40/2022

Citation

2022(7) TAXREPLY 6160
Original Order
My Favorites
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.

TaxGPT Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
  AA   |   Print

ORDER

ORDER 1. A Report dated 30.12.2020 has been received from the Applicant No. 2 i.e. the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after detailed re-investigation under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017 pursuant to Interim Order No 06/2020 dated 03.01.2020 passed by National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA or Authority) in respect of the investigation report of DGAP dated 01.07.2019. The Authority had ordered reinvestigation under the rule 133 (4) on the following grounds:- a. Whether the Respondent's claim of passing on of Rs. 9,45,78,855/- benefit of GST ITC to his homebuyers/customers by way of reduction in GST rate was correct or not? b. Whether the Respondent's claim that for the customers who had made the bookings prior to implementation of GST, i.e. 01.072012 he had charged only 4.5% GST (i.e., equal to the rate of erstwhile Service Tax) from them and borne the remaining 75% GST himself and he had given 100%....

Premium Content !

This is premium content of TaxReply, available to paid subscribers only.

Kindly Subscribe GST Library to unlock all features.
View Subscription Plans
Download Full Judgement :
  Hide
31
May
S
M
T
W
T
F
S