Case Law Details
Principal Commissioner Vs Prasad Media Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (National Anti-Profiteering Authority)
NAA held that Prasad Media Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (Respondent) has resorted to profiteering by way of either increasing the base prices of the service while maintaining the same selling prices or by way of not reducing the selling prices of the service commensurately, despite a reduction in GST rate on Services by way of admission to exhibition of cinematograph films where price of admission ticket is above one hundred rupees” from 28% to 18% w.e,f. 01.01.2019 to 30.06.2019. On this account, the Respondent has realized an additional amount to the tune of Rs. 30,13,0581- from the recipients which included both the profiteered amount and GST on the said profiteered amount. Thus the profiteering is determined as Rs. 30,13,058/- as per the provisions of Rule 133 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017. The Respondent is therefore directed to reduce the prices of his tickets as per the provisions of Rule 133 (3) (a) of the CGST Rules. 2017, keeping in view the reduction in the rate of tax so that the benefit is passed on to the recipients. The Respondent is also directed to deposit the profiteered amount of Rs. 30,13,058/- along with the interest to be calculated @ 18% from the date when the above amount was collected by him from the recipients till the above amount is deposited. Since the recipients, in this case, are not identifiable, the Respondent is directed to deposit the amount of profiteering of Rs. 15,06,529/- in the Central Consumer Welfare Fund (CCWF) and Rs, 15,06,529/- in the Telangana State CWF as per the provisions of Rule 133 (3) (c) of the CGST Rules, 2017, along with 18% interest. The above amount shall be deposited within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of this Order failing which the same shall be recovered by the Commissioner SGST as per the provisions of the SGST Act, 2017.
It has also been found that the Respondent has denied the benefit of rate reduction to his customers/recipients in contravention of the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 and resorted to profiteering and hence, committed an offence under section 171 (3A) of the CGST Act, 2017. Therefore, he is liable for the imposition of penalty under the provisions of the above Section. Accordingly, a notice be issued to him directing him to explain why the penalty prescribed under Section 171 (3A) of the above Act read with Rule 133 (3) (d) of the CGST Rules, 2017 should not be imposed on him
FULL TEXT OF ORDER OF NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING APPELLATE AUTHORITY
1. The present Report dated 50.10.2019 has been received from the Applicant No 2, i.e. the Director-General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAR) after a detailed investigation In line with Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the present case are that the Applicant No. 1 had filed an application dated 28.01.2019 under Rule 128 of the CGST Rules, 2017 alleging profiteering by the Respondent in respect of the supply of “Services by way of admission to exhibition of cinematograph films where the price of admission ticket was above one hundred rupees” despite the reduction in the rate of GST from 28% to 18% w.e,f, 01.01.2019. Along with the application, Applicant No. 1 had also submitted the APAF-1 Form, copies of cinema tickets issued in the pre and post rate reduction period and the details of the GST paid.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
