No action can be taken if no specific evidence of profiteering: NAA

Sh. Raman Khaira Vs M/s. Yum Restaurants India Pvt. Ltd. (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) We have carefully considered the Report filed by the Applicant No. 2 as well as the submissions made by the Respondent No. 1 and it is obvious from the narration of the facts stated above that the investigation conducted in the matter by the Applicant No. 2 against the Respondent No.1 could not establish profiteering for want of credible evidence and hence no violation of the provisions of section 171 of the CGST Act 2017 could be established. Accordingly, the application filed by the applicant seek...