Latest GST Judgments

For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on GST
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our GST Library

Respondent was required to maintain the pre rate reduction base prices which he had failed to do and therefore, he is also liable for profiteering as he was the registered person in terms of Section 171 (1) of the above Act charged with the responsibility of passing on the benefit of tax reduction.

Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017— Anti- Profiteering – The report received from the DGAP after detailed investigation. The Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering requested the DGAP to conduct a detailed investigation on the allegation that respondent had not passed on the benefit of tax reduction from 28% to 18% w.e.f. 15.11.2017, vide Notification No.41/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 14.11.2017, on After-Shave Lotion Park Avenue Good Morning 50 ml which was supplied to M/s Big Bazaar, Inderlok. The DGAP has stated that the other marketing companies were supplying goods to the distributors. The distributors were supplying the above goods to retailers/mega stores such as M/s Big Bazaar, Inderlok. The DGAP has concluded that the Respondent did not reduce the selling price when the GST rate was reduced from 28% to 18% w.e.f. 15.11.2017, and hence he had profiteered and thus the benefit of reduction in the GST rate was not passed on to the recipients by way of commensurate reduction in the price, in terms of Section 171 of the Act, 2017.

Held that:- The Hon’ble Anti-Profiteering Authority held that the Respondents have denied the benefit of tax reduction from 28% to 18% w.e.f. 15.11.2017 to 31.03.2019, in contravention of the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act. 2017 and have thus resorted to profiteering. They are apparently liable for imposition of penalty under the Act. Further, directed the Respondent to reduce the prices of the products and to deposit the profiteered amounts along with the interest. Since, the recipients in this case are not identifiable, the above Respondents are directed to deposit the above amounts of profiteering along with interest in the CWFs of the Central and the concerned State Governments, within a period of 3 months. — Rahul Sharma, M/S Local Circles India Pvt. Ltd. And Director General of Anti-Profiteering, Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs Vs. J.K. Helene Curtis Ltd. And M/S Shree Sai Kripa Marketing [2020] 24 TAXLOK.COM 013 (NAPA)