National Anti-Profiteering Authority orders Radicon to pass on Rs. 40,92,054 benefit to buyers. Penalty notice issued for denying ITC benefit.
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 reduction in […]
Joydeep Sarkar Vs Himalaya Drug Company (NAA) Fact of the Case: The brief facts of the case are that under Rule 128 (1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017 an application dated 27.11.2017 was filed before the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering by the Applicant No. 1 alleging that the Respondent had […]
Director-General of Anti-Profiteering Vs Lifestyle International Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) Facts of the case: The brief facts of the case are that an application dated 23.11.2017 was filed before the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering under Rule 128 of the CGST Rules, 2017, by Ms. Neeru Varshney before the Standing Committee vide which she alleged that the […]
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 […]
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 […]
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 “Food Processor” […]
Rahul Kumar Vs. Emaar MGF Land Ltd. (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) The brief facts of the case are that vide his application dated 07.01.2019 filed before the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering under Rule 128 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017, the Applicant No. 1 had alleged profiteering by the Respondent in respect of purchase of Flat […]
Sh. Rahul Sharma Vs J.K. Helene Curtis Ltd. (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 Raymond Ltd. had not passed […]
