Case Law Details
Shri Rahul Sharma Vs Portonics Digital Pvt Ltd. (National Anti-Profiteering Authority)
Facts of the Case:
The brief facts of the case are that an application dated 26.02.2019 was filed before the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering, under Rule 128 of the CGST Rules, 2017 by the Applicant No. 1 which alleged that the Respondent had profiteered in respect of Power Bank “Portronics Power Slice 10” supplied by the Respondent. The above Applicant also alleged that the Respondent did not reduce the selling price of the Power Bank “Portronics Power Slice 10”, when the GST rate was reduced from 28% to 18% w.e.f. 01.01.2019, vide Notification No. 24/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 31.12.2018 and the price of the product remained the same at Rs. 1349/- and thus, the benefit of reduction in the GST rate was not passed on to the recipients by way of commensurate reduction in the price. The above reference was examined by the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering and vide minutes of the meeting it had forwarded the same to the DGAP for detailed investigation in terms of Rule 129 of the above Rules.
Held by NAA:
After considering all the Reports filed by the DGAP, submissions of the Respondent and other material placed on record and it is revealed that the Respondent did not submit the supply chain wise data to the DGAP during the period of investigation. He has also accepted it during the hearings before this Authority and stated that he had not supplied supply chain wise data. However, the Respondent vide his submissions dated 06.12.2019 has furnished the invoices of sale from different locations/segments along with detailed segment wise invoice details in excel sheets before this Authority. The DGAP, after examining the same has reported vide his supplementary Report that the fresh set of segment/location wise (or in other words supply channel wise) sales data submitted by the Respondent during the hearings before this Authority has been analysed, and that the profiteered amount may vary if the same was determined segment-wise. In such circumstances, NAA are of the opinion that justice cannot be done if the aforementioned supply chain wise data is not reexamined and the profiteered amount is not recomputed. Therefore, without going into merits of the case and without considering the other submissions of the Respondent and the Applicant No.1 at this stage, NAA find it imperative that there is need of recomputation of the profiteered amount. All other submissions of the Applicants and the Respondent will be duly considered after the final computation of the profiteered amount is done. Hence, NAA direct the DGAP to re-compute the profiteered amount keeping in view our above observations and to furnish his report within a period of three months.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
