DGAP investigated the issues of whether the GST rate applicable to the item Shoe Polish was reduced e.f. 15.11.2017 and if so, whether the benefit of such reduction in the rate of tax had been passed on by the Respondent No. 1 to his customers in terms of Section 171 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017....

Shri M. Srinivas Vs Vijetha Supermarkets Pvt. Ltd. (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) The Applicant had alleged that the Respondent had not reduced the selling price of the “Frozen Green Peas”, when the GST rate was reduced from 5 % to Nil w.e.f. 01.01.2019 with denial of Input Tax Credit, vide Notification No. 25/2018-Cen...

Smt. Honey Macker Vs M/s Pivotal Infrastructure Pvt Ltd. (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) Applicants, the Respondent and the other material placed on record and find that the Applicant No. 1 vide her complaint dated 03.08.2018 had alleged that the Respondent was not passing on the benefit of ITC to her in spite of the fact that [&he...

Sh. Puneet Bansal Vs Emaar MGF Land Ltd. (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) It is established from the perusal of the above facts that the Respondent has benefited from the additional ITC to the extent of 8.73% of the turnover during the period from July, 2017 to March, 2019 and hence the provisions of Section 171 of […]...

Shri Kamal Nayan Singhania Vs Elegant Properties (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) In this case Respondent has profiteered by an amount of Rs. 1,42,369/- during the period of investigation. Therefore, this Authority under Rule 133 (3) (a) of the CGST Rules, 2017 orders that the Respondent shall reduce the prices to be realized from t...

Amarjeet Singh Yadav Vs Radicon Infrastructure & Housing Private Limited (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) National Anti-Profiteering Authority hereby determines the profiteered amount as Rs. 40,92,054/- in terms of Rule 133 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017 and directs the Respondent to pass on the benefit of Rs. 6,982/- [21,496 – 1...

Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti Profiteering Vs Whirlpool of India Ltd. (NAA) NAA determines amount profiteered by Whirlpool  at Rs. 4,07,451/- and directed Whirlpool  to reduce the price of Refrigerator Whirlpool (HSN code 84182100) as per the provisions of Rule 133 (3) (a) of the CGST Rules, 2017, keeping in view the reductio...

Shri Kapil Dev Sharma Vs Director General of Anti-Profiteering (NAA) The DGAP has further reported that Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 came into play in the event where there was a reduction in the rate of tax or there was an increase in the benefit of ITC. In the present case, since the […]...

Rahul Sharma Vs Tanya Enterprises (NAA) The brief facts of the case are that the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering vide its communication dated 11.03.2019 had requested the DGAP to conduct a detailed investigation as per Rule 129 (1) of the above Rules on the allegation that M/s Vini Cosmetics Pvt. Ltd. had not passed on […]...

Kerala State Level Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering Vs Phillips India Ltd. (NAA) The brief facts of the case are that the Applicant No. 1 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 “F...