Anti-Profiteering — The brief facts of the present case are that a reference was received from the Standing Committee on Anti Profiteering on 27.03.2019 by the DGAP. to conduct a detailed investigation in respect of an application originally examined by the Maharashtra State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering filed under Rule 128 of the CGST Rules 2017, alleging profiteering in respect of restaurant service supplied by the Respondent (Franchisee of M/s Subway Systems India Pvt. Ltd.) despite reduction in the rate of GST from 18% to 5% w.e.f. 15.11.2017. It was alleged that the Respondent had increased the base prices of his products and had not passed on the benefit of reduction in the GST rate from 18% to 5% w.e.f. 15.11.2017, affected vide Notification No. 46/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 14.11.2017 by way of commensurate reduction in prices, in terms of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017. Held that— It is evident from the above narration of facts that 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. Hence, he has committed an offence under section 171 (3A) of the CGST Act, 2017 and therefore, he is liable for the imposition of penalty under the provisions of the above Section. — Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Director General of Anti-Profiteering, Central Board of Indirect Taxes And Customs Vs. N. Rai Delights LLP [2020] 22 TAXLOK.COM 090 (NAPA)