Shri Rahul Sharma Vs Barbeque Nation Hospitality Ltd.(National Anti-Profiteering Authority)
Brief facts of the case are that an application dated 31.07.2018 was filed, under Rule 128 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017 by the Applicant No. 1 alleging profiteering by the Respondent, by not passing on the benefit of reduction in the GST rate from 18% to 5% w.e.f. 15.11.2017, vide Notification No. 46/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 14.11.2017, by way of commensurate reduction in the price, in terms of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017. The Applicant No. 1 had alleged that the Respondent increased the base price of “Dinner Veg.” from Rs. 862/- to Rs. 929/- and that of “Dinner Non-Veg.” from Rs. 969/- to Rs. 1039/- when the GST rate was reduced from 18% to 5% w.e.f. 15.11.2017.
Comparing of the average pre rate reduction base prices with the average post rate reduction base prices runs completely contrary to the methodology determined by this Authority as well as the provisions of Section 171 of the above Act. It also leads to the conclusion that the profiteered amount calculated by the DGAP on the basis of the above methodology is not accurate and hence, the same cannot be accepted to be correct. Moreover, the quantum of benefit computed by the DGAP on each SKU which is required to be passed on to the eligible buyers is also not correct. The Respondent cannot be allowed to enrich himself at the expense of the customers who are voiceless, unorganised and vulnerable appropriate the benefit of tax reduction which he is not required to pass on from his own pocket as it has been granted by the Central and the State Governments from their scarce tax revenue. Accordingly, the reasons given by the DGAP for diverting from the approved methodology on the ground that the invoice wise details of the outward taxable supplies were not supplied by the Respondent for the period from 15.11.2017 to 31.03.2019 are not convincing and justified as the Respondent was bound to supply the above details. Hence, on the basis of the above grounds the Report dated 24.09.2019 furnished by the DGAP cannot be accepted and therefore, the DGAP is directed to conduct further investigation in the present case under Rule 133 (4) of the CGST Rules, 2017.
FULL TEXT OF ORDER OF NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
1. This Report dated 24.09.2019 has been received from the Applicant No. 2 i.e. the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP), under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. Brief facts of the case are that an application dated 31.07.2018 was filed, under Rule 128 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017 by the Applicant No. 1 alleging profiteering by the Respondent, by not passing on the benefit of reduction in the GST rate from 18% to 5% w.e.f. 15.11.2017, vide Notification No. 46/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 14.11.2017, by way of commensurate reduction in the price, in terms of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017. The Applicant No. 1 had alleged that the Respondent increased the base price of “Dinner Veg.” from Rs. 862/- to Rs. 929/- and that of “Dinner Non-Veg.” from Rs. 969/- to Rs. 1039/- when the GST rate was reduced from 18% to 5% w.e.f. 15.11.2017. The Applicant had also enclosed copies of the invoices dated 09.11.2017 and 15.11.2017 along with his application filed in APAF-1 form. The details of the above invoices issued by the Respondent before and after the GST rate reduction w.e.f 15.11.2017, are furnished in Table- ‘A’ below:-
Table- ‘A’
