Latest GST Judgments

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

Based on the facts it is clear that the Respondent has not contravened the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 and hence there is no merit in the application filed by the Applicant.

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd. 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 Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering had referred the present case to the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering, alleging profiteering by the Respondent on the supply of the product Paint (AP Apex Classic WT 10 LT (HSN Code 3209)), by not passing on the benefit of reduction in the rate of tax of GST w.e.f. 01.07.2017. The Kerala State Screening Committee had relied on two invoices issued by the Respondent, one dated 20.06.2017 (Pre-GST rate reduction) and the other dated 09.11.2017 (Post-GST rate reduction). The DGAP stated that the total tax rate has been reduced from 28.60% to 28% post implementation of the GST and further stated that this increase was primarily on account of the reduction in the discount and such an increase couldn't qualify as profiteering due to reduction in the tax rate, thus, the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 relating to profiteering were not contravened in this case.

Held that:- The Hon’ble Anti-Profiteering Authority held that the reduction in discount doesn't amount to profiteering as the same was offered from his profit margin by the Respondent and doesn't not form part of the base price and therefore, the Respondent cannot be held guilty under Section 171 of the Act.Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering, Director General Anti-Profiteering, Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs Vs. Asian Paints Ltd. [2018] 7 TAXLOK.COM 058 (NAPA)