Anti-Profiteering — The brief facts of the case are that the Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering, vide the minutes of its meeting held on 08.05.2018 had referred the present case to the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering, alleging profiteering by the Respondent on the supply of "Trousers" (Denim Jeans Design 899), by not passing on the benefit of reduction in the rate of tax at the time of implementation of the GST w.e.f. 01.07.2017. It was alleged that the Respondent had indulged in profiteering in contravention of the provisions of Section 171 of CGST Act, 2017.

Held that—from the perusal of the facts of the case and the evidence on record that there was no reduction in the rate of tax on the above product w.e.f. 01.07.2017 and hence the anti-profiteering provisions contained in Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 are not attracted. Also, there is no increase in the per unit base price (excluding tax) of the above product and therefore the allegation of profiteering is not sustainable in terms of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017. As such, we do not find any merit in the application filed by the above Applicants and accordingly, the same is dismissed.—Kerala State Screening Committee On Anti-Profiteering., Director General Anti-Profiteering, Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs Vs. Emke Silks & Garments Pvt. Ltd. [2019] 9 TAXLOK.COM 014 (NAPA)