Case Law Details
Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering Vs M/s Sudarsans (NAA)
DGAP has submitted in his report that the rate of tax on the product (Jockey Socks 7052 FS ASSTD) remained same in the pre-GST and the post- GST era. Moreover, the pre-GST and post-GST base prices (excluding tax) had remained the same. Therefore, the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 have not been contravened and the allegation of profiteering by the Respondent was not established.
FULL TEXT OF ORDER OF NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY (NAA)
1. The present report dated 08.11.2018 has been received from the Directorate General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after detailed investigation under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. 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 “Socks” (Jockey Socks 7052 FS ASSTD) 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. Thus it was alleged that the Respondent had indulged in profiteering in contravention of the provisions of Section 171 of Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. In this regard, the Kerala State Screening Committee has relied on two invoices issued by the Respondent, one invoice No. 19 dated 01.04.2017 (Pre-GST) and the other invoice No. GB 1608 dated 09.10.2017 (Post-GST).
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
