{"id":75729,"date":"2026-05-18T08:40:42","date_gmt":"2026-05-18T08:40:42","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2026-05-18T08:40:42","modified_gmt":"2026-05-18T08:40:42","slug":"anti-profiteering-liability-confirmed-for-unpassed-input-tax-credit-with-interest-ordered-and-separate-cancellation-claim-excluded","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/?p=75729","title":{"rendered":"Anti-profiteering liability confirmed for unpassed input tax credit, with interest ordered and separate cancellation claim excluded."},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Anti-profiteering liability confirmed for unpassed input tax credit, with interest ordered and separate cancellation claim excluded.<br \/>Case-Laws<br \/>GST<br \/>The Tribunal accepted the re-investigation report on anti-profiteering, holding that the respondent had failed to commensurately pass on the input tax credit benefit and had thereby contravened the anti-profiteering obligation. It relied on the quantified balance worked out after crediting benefits already passed to home-buyers and directed return of the remaining profiteered amount with interest at 18% from the date of collection until repayment. Separately, it held that the applicant&#39;s grievance over interest on money retained after cancellation of allotment arose from a different dispute already pursued before the RERA forum and fell outside the statutory scope of anti-profiteering proceedings, leaving that claim to the appropriate forum.<br \/> TMI Updates &#8211; Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts <\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">=  =  =  =  =  =  =  =<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><strong>Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong><BR>For full text:-<a href=\"https:\/\/www.taxtmi.com\/highlights?id=99880\">Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">=  =  =  =  =  =  =  =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Anti-profiteering liability confirmed for unpassed input tax credit, with interest ordered and separate cancellation claim excluded.Case-LawsGSTThe Tribunal accepted the re-investigation report on anti-profiteering, holding that the respondent had fail&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"close","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-75729","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75729","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=75729"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75729\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=75729"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=75729"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=75729"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}