Later Order in Another Case Is No Ground to Rectify Anti‑Profiteering Order: GSTAT Principal Bench

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench refused to delete the GST component of a profiteered amount, but let a developer deposit untraceable homebuyers’ refunds in consumer welfare funds.

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Principal Bench has held that a later order in another anti‑profiteering case does not show a mistake apparent from the record and cannot be used to rectify a concluded order under Rule 31 of the GSTAT (Anti‑Profiteering Methodology and Procedure) Rules, 2025 [DGAP v. Bengal Shapoorji Housing Development Pvt. Ltd., 2026-juristway.com-3420-GSTAT(New Delhi-[PB])-GST].

A. Venu Prasad, Member (Technical), decided the developer’s application. By an order dated 27 Apr 2026, the Tribunal had directed it to refund ₹1,33,32,208 of profiteered input tax credit benefit, plus the GST component of ₹15,99,865, with interest at 18%, to homebuyers under Section 171 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

The developer sought leave to deposit amounts in consumer welfare funds where buyers’ bank details were unavailable, deletion of the GST component as already paid to the Government, and relief similar to that granted in DGAP v. Bengal Emami Housing Ltd. (Appeal No. NAPA/141/PB/2025) on 2 Sep 2026.

Relying on Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. v. CIT (2007) and State of Punjab v. Darshan Singh (2004), the Tribunal held that rectification corrects clerical, arithmetical or factual mistakes apparent from the record; it is not a power of review. A subsequent order in separate proceedings, or relief there that a party finds favourable, does not establish such a mistake.

The request to delete the GST component was rejected, and the determination of ₹1,49,32,073 and the 18% interest remain unchanged. Deposit in the consumer welfare funds was allowed only where direct refund is not possible, with half of such amounts going to the Central Consumer Welfare Fund, subject to Rule 133(3)(c) of the CGST Rules and homebuyer‑wise records of efforts made.

The developer must refund buyers directly wherever details are available, pay the original complainant with interest, and comply within 30 days, failing which a penalty of 10% of the profiteered amount under Section 171(3A) will be imposed.

2026-juristway.com-3420-GSTAT(New Delhi-[PB])-GST