Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Principal Commissioner Vs Devi 70 MM (NAA)
Appeal Number : I.O. No. 22/2020
Date of Judgement/Order : 07/10/2020
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Principal Commissioner Vs Devi 70 MM (NAA)

The National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA) directed the Directorate General of Anti-Profiteering to reinvestigate and recompute the quantum of profiteering against Devi Cinema.

It is a fact that the price of two categories i.e. the First and the Second class movie tickets has been reduced commensurately by the Respondent w.e.f. 11.03.2019. Since he has complied with the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017, the period from 11.03.2019 has no relevance from the perspective of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017, and hence, no profiteering can be established for the period after 11.03.2019. While taking this view, we take into cognizance of the fact that this Authority is not a price regulator. Thus, in this case, since the Respondent has increased the price of the movie tickets of the First and the Second class categories only in the month of May 2019, this price increase cannot be correlated to provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017. It is also a fact that the DGAP has reported that in the post-tax-rate reduction period, the Respondent has maintained the same base prices in respect of the Upper and Lower Balcony categories of movie tickets and hence, we observe that there is no profiteering in the above category of these movie tickets. Therefore, though profiteering has been established against the Respondent in the categories of First class and Second class movie tickets, the computation of profiteering merits to be limited only up to 10.03.2019 as the Respondent had reduced the base prices commensurately for the First class and Second class movie tickets after 11.03.2019. No profiteering can thus arise for the period after 11.03.2019. Therefore, given the above, we find this case to be a fit case for recomputation of the amount of profiteering in line with the above observations.

29. Therefore, under the provisions of Rule 133(4) of the CGST Rules 2017, this Authority directs the DGAP to recompute the amount of profiteering in line with the observations made in the preceding paragraph. The DGAP is further directed to furnish his Report under Rule 129 (6) 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

Tags:

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