Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Director General of Anti-Profiteering Vs Raj & Company (NAA)
Appeal Number : I.O. No. 20/2022
Date of Judgement/Order : 28/09/2022
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Director General of Anti-Profiteering Vs Raj & Company (NAA)

There is no dispute with regard to the reduction of the tax in respect of subject products supplied by the Respondent with effect from 15-11-2017. The Government by Notification No 41/2017-CT (Rate) dated 14-11-­2017 has reduced rates on subject products. In view of the above said facts and the records, the Authority has observed that the Respondent, M/s Raj & Company was a distributor of M/s L’Oreal India Pvt. Ltd. The Authority finds that M/s L’Oreal India Pvt. Ltd. was investigated by the DGAP for allegations of profiteering and not passed on the benefit of reduction of GST rate after the said Notification dated 14.11.2017 and the Authority has found them violating the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 for the products sold by them for the period from 01.04.2018 to 31.12.2018, and, this Authority vide Order No. 26/2022 dated 23.06.2022, has also confirmed profiteering to the tune of Rs. 186,39,57,058/- against M/s L’Oreal India Pvt. Ltd. for the period from 15.11.2017 to 31.12.2018.

In view of the above facts, this Authority is of the opinion that the amount of profiteering calculated against the Respondent might have been already calculated and confirmed against M/s L’Oreal India Pvt. Ltd. as the period of investigation in the present case is already covered in the period of investigation in case of M/s L’Oreal India Pvt. Ltd. and the products on which profiteering has been calculated in the present case, have been included in the case of M/s L’Oreal India Pvt. Ltd.

Hence, considering the above facts on record and to avoid the duplication and doubling of confirming of profiteered amount, this Authority directs the DGAP to re-investigate/re-examine the matter and make sure whether the amount of profiteering calculated in the present case has already been considered in the case of M/s L’Oreal India Pvt. Ltd. or not, under Rule 133(4) of the CGST Rules, 2017

FULL TEXT OF ORDER OF NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031