Anti-Profiteering — benefit of reduction of tax from 18% to 5% not passed to customers—In the instant case, it was also alleged that Respondent was illegally profiteering by appropriating the amount of reduction of tax by fleecing the poor customers as he was denying them the benefit of reduction.

Held that— The investigation conducted in the matter by the Applicant No. 2 against the Respondent No. 1 could not establish profiteering for want of credible evidence and hence no violation of the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act 2017 could be established - there are no violation of the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 - application dismissed.[SH. RAMAN KHAIRA, DIRECTOR GENERAL ANTI-PROFITEERING, CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES & CUSTOMS VERSUS M/S. YUM RESTAURANTS INDIA PVT. LTD.,] [NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY]