Since, no penalty provisions were in existence between the period from 15.11.2017 to 31.03.2018 when the Respondent had violated the provisions of Section 171 (1), the penalty prescribed under Section 171 (3A) can not be imposed on the Respondent retrospectively.
Anti-profiteering—The brief facts of the present case are that the Applicant vide his Report furnished to this Authority under Rule 129 (6) of the CGST Rules, 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 to his recipients, the benefit of reduction in the rate of tax of GST w.e.f. 15.11.2017 from 28% to 18% in respect of his supplies of “Fortune ADW Detergent 1Kg” and “Fortune Rinse Aid 500 ml.”
Held that—Since, no penalty provisions were in existence between the period from 15.11.2017 to 31.03.2018 when the Respondent had violated the provisions of Section 171 (1), the penalty prescribed under Section 171 (3A) can not be imposed on the Respondent retrospectively. Accordingly, the notice dated 24.01.2019 issued the Respondent for imposition of penalty under Section 122 (1) is hereby withdrawn and the present penalty proceedings launched against him are accordingly dropped.
Since, no penalty provisions were in existence between the period from 15.11.2017 to 31.03.2018 when the Respondent had violated the provisions of Section 171 (1), the penalty prescribed under Section 171 (3A) can not be imposed on the Respondent retrospectively.
Anti-profiteering—The brief facts of the present case are that the Applicant vide his Report furnished to this Authority under Rule 129 (6) of the CGST Rules, 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 to his recipients, the benefit of reduction in the rate of tax of GST w.e.f. 15.11.2017 from 28% to 18% in respect of his supplies of “Fortune ADW Detergent 1Kg” and “Fortune Rinse Aid 500 ml.”
Held that—Since, no penalty provisions were in existence between the period from 15.11.2017 to 31.03.2018 when the Respondent had violated the provisions of Section 171 (1), the penalty prescribed under Section 171 (3A) can not be imposed on the Respondent retrospectively. Accordingly, the notice dated 24.01.2019 issued the Respondent for imposition of penalty under Section 122 (1) is hereby withdrawn and the present penalty proceedings launched against him are accordingly dropped.