Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering Vs Ms. Rosata Vitrified Pvt. Ltd. (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) It was from the Invoices submitted clear that the base price of the product Vitrified Tiles Super Nano Plus (HSN Code 69072100) per box was Rs. 294.50 prior to 15.11.2017 and had remained the same even after GST rate reduction […]
It is evident from the above that the Respondent has denied benefit of ITC to the Applicants as well as the rest 64 purchasers of flats in contravention of the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 and has thus realized more price from them than what he was entitled to charge and has also compelled them to pay more GST than what they were required to pay
Kerala State Level Screening Committee Vs M/s Peps Industries Pvt. Ltd (NAA) It is apparent from the perusal of the facts of the case that admittedly there was a decrease in the rate of tax on the said product from 28% to 18% w.e.f. 15.11.2017 but it is also established that the base (excluding GST) of the […]
Respondent cannot escape the legal obligation which was imposed upon him by Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017, by shifting his accountability on this ground. Therefore, the above contention of the appellant cannot be accepted.
Respondent had not increased the discounted per M2price of the above product which had remained Rs. 374.74/- before and after the tax reduction, as was evident from both the invoices issued by him before and after the tax reduction and therefore, the benefit of tax reduction has duly been passed on to the customers by the Respondent. Hence, the allegation of profiteering is not established
Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering Vs M/s. Asian Paints Ltd. (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) From the invoices referred, it is evident that the Respondent had maintained the same base price post reduction in the rate of tax w.e.f. 15.11.2017, resulting in reduction in the cum-tax price from Rs. 175.40/- to Rs. 161.70/- on the product […]
State Level Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering Vs M/s Ramraj Handlooms (NAA) In this case there was no reduction in the rate of tax on ‘Little Stars Dhoti’ w.e.f. 01-07-2017 and that the rate of tax in the Post-GST era has also been increased from CST @ 2% to IGST @ 5%. therefore, the allegation of […]
Shri Rahul Sharma Vs M/s. Cloudtail India Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) (i) Firstly, the Respondent, as discussed in para 12 to 14 above, has submitted that the proceedings initiated should be deemed infructuous as the complaint under Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017;was not against him but against HP India who was the brand owner […]
It is revealed that the rate of tax was 30.06% in the pre-GST era which was reduced to 28% in the post-GST era vide Notification No. 1/2017 Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06,2017, and the rate of GST was further reduced from 28% to 18% vide Notification No. 41/2017– Central Tax (Rate) dated 14 11.2017 However, during these periods, the base price of the product was increased from Rs. 202.06 to Rs, 230.90 per unit which resulted in increasing of the selling price amounting to denial of not passing the benefit of tax reduction to the customer.
Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering Vs Director General Anti-Profiteering (NAA) On perusal of the facts of the case and the details provided in the table given above in para 4 it is apparent that there was no reduction of tax with the introduction of GST. The DGAP on examining various facts has categorically mentioned […]
