Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, Anti-Profiteering Division · GST · AKHB case note
Director General of Anti-Profiteering v. Sunrise Lifespaces LLP
NAPA/152/PB/2025
No neutral or reporter citation printed in the identified official order. ·
Final report-based no-profiteering disposal with limited published reasoning.
Sunrise Lifespaces on acceptance of the recorded no-profiteering report and disposal.
01 · Facts of the case and issues
Following the earlier hearing order, the registry emailed the complainant a link to attend virtually and recorded receipt. No one appeared for the complainant. Counsel for the respondent requested acceptance of the DGAP report; the departmental representative stated that the report’s paragraphs 29–30 found no profiteering and no Section 171 contravention.
Source: Paragraphs 4–10, physical p. 3; summary p. 1.
02 · Discussion and reasoning of the Hon’ble Court
The Tribunal accepted the report against that procedural and investigative background. Unlike a detailed calculation judgment, the published page does not reproduce the project facts, amounts or analysis underpinning the no-profiteering conclusion. The absence of those details limits the general propositions that can be drawn from the order.
Source: Paragraphs 4–10, physical p. 3; summary p. 1.
03 · Judicial decision and operative relief
The DGAP report dated 5 December 2024 was accepted and the matter disposed of on 16 January 2026. The reasoned order contains no fresh refund, interest or penalty direction.
Source: Paragraphs 4–10, physical p. 3; summary p. 1.
04 · In favour of
Final report-based no-profiteering disposal with limited published reasoning.
Source: Paragraphs 4–10, physical p. 3; summary p. 1.
05 · AKHB REVIEW POINT
AKHB analysis: A report-based no-profiteering disposal should be described accurately without fabricating its underlying calculations. The Tribunal recorded both service/non-appearance and DGAP’s stated conclusion. This is not authority for a universal rule that non-appearance alone proves the respondent complied with every obligation. Obtain the accepted report before applying its factual reasoning to another project or period.
Source: AKHB source-based analysis of paragraphs 4–10, physical p. 3; summary p. 1.
Source and verification
Complete 3-page original read and visually checked. · Individual hosted copy of the original judgment
Complete 3-page official GSTAT order. Underlying reports and documents mentioned in the reasons were not independently obtained.
Source checked 2026-10-17. Paragraph references follow the identified official judgment; PDF-page references follow that source file. The court’s printed paragraph numbers may differ from commercial reporting.
All source pages text/visual checked.
No source text or existing entry altered.
Statutory scope
Historical source-based explanation of this final disposition; no independent statement of current tax law.
Later treatment and present applicability
Bounded exact-party/case/date and recall or appeal searches on 17 October 2026 identified no later primary order affecting this disposition. This is not exhaustive docket clearance or verification of compliance.
Additional identified sources
AI disclosure & professional disclaimer
AI-assisted research checked against the identified primary source. Extraction, interpretation or omission errors remain possible. Source review does not mean independent approval by a practising professional. Verify every material statement against the complete original judgment.
General research information only; not legal or tax advice, a certified judgment or a substitute for the full order. Applicability depends on the facts, tax period, statutory version and jurisdiction. Subsequent treatment is unverified unless the note expressly identifies the sources checked. Downloading does not create a professional engagement. Obtain case-specific advice before reliance.