Latest GST Judgments

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

Respondents are liable for the imposition of penalty under Section 171 (3A) of the CGST Act

Anti-Profiteering — The brief facts of the present case are that the Applicant had filed applicationbefore the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering stating that the Respondenthad resorted to profiteering in respect of supply of “Dettol HW Liquid Original 900 ml” and had also alleged that the Respondent No. 1 had not passed on the benefit of reduction in the GST rate from 28% to 18% w.e.f. 15.11.2017, vide Notification No. 41/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 14.11.2017 and instead, increased the base price of the above product. Held that— It is evident from that the Respondent No. 1 and 2 have denied the benefit of tax reduction to the customers in contravention of the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 and have thus profiteered as per the explanation attached to Section 171 of the above Act. Therefore, both the Respondents are apparently liable for the imposition of penalty under Section 171 (3A) of the CGST Act, 2017. Therefore, a show cause notice be issued directing them to explain why the penalty prescribed under the above sub-Section should not be imposed on him. — Rahul Sharma, M/S. Local Circles (I) Pvt. Ltd., Director General of Anti-Profiteering, Indirect Taxes And Customs Vs. Reckitt Benckiser India Pvt. Ltd. And Affiniti Enterprises [2020] 22 TAXLOK.COM 115 (NAPA)