Latest GST Judgments

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

The Respondent has denied the benefit of tax reduction to the customers in contravention of the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 and he has thus resorted to profiteering.

Anti-Profiteering — Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017— The application filed alleging profiteering in respect of restaurant service supplied by the Respondent (Franchisee of M/s. Subway India Pvt. Ltd.). It was alleged that despite reduction in the rate of GST from 18% to 5% w.e.f. 15.11.2017, the Respondent had not passed on the commensurate benefit of tax reduction as he had increased the base prices of his products. The DGAP submitted that the allegation of profiteering by - way of either increasing the base prices of the products while maintaining the same selling prices or by way of not reducing the selling prices of the products commensurately, despite the reduction in the rate of GST stood confirmed, thus, the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the Act, 2017 have been contravened by the Respondent.
Held that:- The Hon’ble Anti-Profiteering Authority directed the Respondent to reduce his prices commensurately in terms of Rule 133(3) (a). The Respondent has denied the benefit of tax reduction to the customers in contravention of the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the Act and has thus resorted to profiteering, hence, liable to penal action.—Director General of Anti-Profiteering, Central Board Of Indirect Taxes & Customs. Vs. Neeva Foods Pvt. Ltd. [2020] 26 TAXLOK.COM 019 (NAPA)