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 has thus profiteered as per the explanation attached to Section 171 of the above Act.

Anti-Profiteering Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017— The report has been received from the Directorate General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after detailed investigation. The Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering requested the DGAP to conduct a detailed investigation on the allegation that M/s. Vini Cosmetics Pvt. Ltd. had not passed on the benefit of tax reduction from 28% to 18% w.e.f. 15.11.2017 on “Fogg Deo Fougere BX 150 ml” which was supplied to M/s. Big Bazaar, Inderlok. The DGAP concluded that the amount of net higher sales realization on account of the increase in the base price of the product, despite the reduction in the GST rate from 28% to 18%, came to Rs. 8,50,442/- inclusive of the excess GST so collected by the Respondent from Recipient.
Held that:- The Hon’ble Anti-Profiteering Authority held that the Respondent has denied the benefit of tax reduction to the customers and has thus profiteered as per the explanation attached to Section 171 of the above Act and therefore, he is liable to be penalized under the provisions of the Section 171 of the Act, 2017.—Rahul Sharma, M/S. Local Circles India Pvt. Ltd., Director General of Anti-Profiteering, Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs Vs. Tanya Enterprises [2020] 24 TAXLOK.COM 030 (NAPA)