Anti-Profiteering

Is Anti Profiteering is Anti Business?

Goods and Services Tax - There is great dilemma in pricing of products so much so that for every overvaluation businesses are suspected of money laundering and for every undervaluation they are suspected of tax evasion. Adding to this is Section 171 of the CGST Act which reads as below:- 1) Any reduction in rate of tax on any supply […]...

Read More

NAA holds McDonald’s franchisee Hardcastle Restaurants Guilty of Profiteering

Goods and Services Tax - The Hon’ble National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA), in the case of DGAP vs. Hardcastle Restaurants [Case No. 79/2020 dated December 9, 2020] held that, the Hardcastle Restaurants (Respondent) has committed an offence by denying the  benefit of rate reduction to the buyers of his products in contravention of the provisions of Sectio...

Read More

Patanjali GST Profiteering Case for Supply of Detergent Powder

Goods and Services Tax - It is a proven fact that anti-profiteering provisions actually work and section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 provides protection to the customers against illegal, inappropriate and excessive profiteering resorted by suppliers of goods and services. It becomes quite clear when rates are not reduced at all or commensurate with reduction in GST...

Read More

GST Profiteering established in Duracell Battery supply case: NAA

Goods and Services Tax - D.S. Brothers Vs Durga Marketing Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) GST Profiteering of Rs. 1,57,200 established in the case of supply of Duracell Battery AA/6 by respondent. NAA asked to deposit the same in consumer welfare fund along with interest @ 18%. Facts of Case The brief facts of the case are that an application was filed […]...

Read More

Anti-Profiteering under GST: Analysis of Recent Decisions and comparison with other jurisdictions

Goods and Services Tax - Introduction With the introduction of the Goods and Services Tax (GST), the entire landscape of indirect taxation in India has undergone an upheaval. The GST has been hailed as a revolutionary enactment which would remove the cascading effect of taxes, i.e. no longer would tax on tax be have to be paid. To do this […]...

Read More

Empanelment & Guidelines for empanelment of Advocates to defend NAA

Goods and Services Tax - Empanelment of Advocates / Law Firms for representing the National Anti-profiteering Authority and Director General of Anti-Profiteering before various Courts and Tribunals....

Read More

NAA passes 60 orders against complaints of profiteering

Goods and Services Tax - Anti-Profiteering Measures The National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA) was constituted on 28th November, 2017 under Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 to ensure that the reduction in rate of tax or the benefit of input tax credit is passed on to the recipient by way of commensurate reduction in prices. Important steps taken by the NAA ...

Read More

HC Grant stay to ‘Tata Starbucks’ subject to payment of principal profiteered amount

Tata Starbucks Private Limited Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court) - Tata Starbucks Private Limited Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court) Subject to the petitioner depositing the entire principal profiteered amount i.e. Rs. 1,04,70,664/- as levied excluding the GST amount already deposited, within four months, in equal monthly instalments, there shall be a stay, as fa...

Read More

Subwest Restaurant not passed benefit of GST rate reduction: NAA

Hussain Shoaib Kothalia Vs Subwest Restaurant LLP (NAA) - Hussain Shoaib Kothalia Vs Subwest Restaurant LLP  (NAA) The brief facts of the case are that an application was filed by the Applicant No. 1 with the Maharashtra State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering alleging profiteering in respect of restaurant service supplied by the Respondent despite...

Read More

Anti-Profiteering penalty not in existence between period w.e.f. 01.07.2017 to 31.12.2018

Potnoor Naveen Vs Caroa Properties LLP (NAA) - Potnoor Naveen Vs Caroa Properties LLP (NAA) NAA held that Since, no penalty provisions were in existence between the period w.e.f. 01.07.2017 to 31.12.2018 when the Respondent had violated the provisions of Section 171 (1), the penalty prescribed under Section 171 (3A) cannot be imposed on the Resp...

Read More

Section 171(1) violation not covered U/s. 122(1)(i) of CGST Act, 2017

Crown Express Dental Lab Vs Theco India Private Limited (NAA) - Crown Express Dental Lab Vs Theco India Private Limited (NAA) From the perusal of Section 122 (1) (i) of the CGST Act, 2017, it is clear that the violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1) is not covered under Section 122 (1) (i) of the CGST Act, 2017 as it does not provide penalty […]...

Read More

Inox Leisure guilty of not passing benefit of reduction in GST rate: NAA

Shri. I.P Saji Vs Inox Leisure Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) - Shri. I.P Saji Vs Inox Leisure Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) The brief facts of the case are that a reference was received from the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering from Applicant No. 1, alleging profiteering in respect of the supply of restaurant service despite a reduction in the rate of GST from 18% to ...

Read More
Sorry No Post Found

Anti-Profiteering’s Popular Posts

Recent Posts in "Anti-Profiteering"

HC Grant stay to ‘Tata Starbucks’ subject to payment of principal profiteered amount

Tata Starbucks Private Limited Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court)

Tata Starbucks Private Limited Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court) Subject to the petitioner depositing the entire principal profiteered amount i.e. Rs. 1,04,70,664/- as levied excluding the GST amount already deposited, within four months, in equal monthly instalments, there shall be a stay, as far as the direction for payment is concer...

Read More

Subwest Restaurant not passed benefit of GST rate reduction: NAA

Hussain Shoaib Kothalia Vs Subwest Restaurant LLP (NAA)

Hussain Shoaib Kothalia Vs Subwest Restaurant LLP  (NAA) The brief facts of the case are that an application was filed by the Applicant No. 1 with the Maharashtra State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering alleging profiteering in respect of restaurant service supplied by the Respondent despite the reduction in the rate of GST from 1...

Read More

Anti-Profiteering penalty not in existence between period w.e.f. 01.07.2017 to 31.12.2018

Potnoor Naveen Vs Caroa Properties LLP (NAA)

Potnoor Naveen Vs Caroa Properties LLP (NAA) NAA held that Since, no penalty provisions were in existence between the period w.e.f. 01.07.2017 to 31.12.2018 when the Respondent had violated the provisions of Section 171 (1), the penalty prescribed under Section 171 (3A) cannot be imposed on the Respondent retrospectively. Accordingly, the...

Read More

Section 171(1) violation not covered U/s. 122(1)(i) of CGST Act, 2017

Crown Express Dental Lab Vs Theco India Private Limited (NAA)

Crown Express Dental Lab Vs Theco India Private Limited (NAA) From the perusal of Section 122 (1) (i) of the CGST Act, 2017, it is clear that the violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1) is not covered under Section 122 (1) (i) of the CGST Act, 2017 as it does not provide penalty […]...

Read More

Inox Leisure guilty of not passing benefit of reduction in GST rate: NAA

Shri. I.P Saji Vs Inox Leisure Pvt. Ltd. (NAA)

Shri. I.P Saji Vs Inox Leisure Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) The brief facts of the case are that a reference was received from the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering from Applicant No. 1, alleging profiteering in respect of the supply of restaurant service despite a reduction in the rate of GST from 18% to 5% w.e.f. 15.11.2017. […]...

Read More

Is Anti Profiteering is Anti Business?

There is great dilemma in pricing of products so much so that for every overvaluation businesses are suspected of money laundering and for every undervaluation they are suspected of tax evasion. Adding to this is Section 171 of the CGST Act which reads as below:- 1) Any reduction in rate of tax on any supply […]...

Read More

NAA holds McDonald’s franchisee Hardcastle Restaurants Guilty of Profiteering

The Hon’ble National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA), in the case of DGAP vs. Hardcastle Restaurants [Case No. 79/2020 dated December 9, 2020] held that, the Hardcastle Restaurants (Respondent) has committed an offence by denying the  benefit of rate reduction to the buyers of his products in contravention of the provisions of Sectio...

Read More

No penalty under Section 122(1)(i) for violation of Anti Profiteering Provisions

Shri Surya Prakash Loonkar Vs M/s Excel Rasayan Pvt. Ltd. (NAA)

Shri Surya Prakash Loonkar Vs M/s Excel Rasayan Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) From the perusal of Section 122 (1) (i) of the CGST Act, 2017, it is clear that the violation of the provisions of Section 171 (1) is not covered under Section 122 (1) (i) of the CGST Act, 2017 as it does not provide […]...

Read More

No penalty for violation of Section 171(1) provisions before 01.01.2020

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

Director General of Anti-Profiteering Vs Raj & Company (NAA) Section 112 of the Finance Act, 2019 specific penalty provisions have been added for violation of the provisions of Section 171(1) which have come in to force w.e.f. 01.01.2020, by inserting Section 171 (3A). Since, no penalty provisions were in existence between the period ...

Read More

Section 171(3A) Penalty cannot be imposed prior to 01.01.2020

Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering Vs Dev Snacks Cheriyela (NAA)

Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering Vs Dev Snacks Cheriyela (NAA) Since, no penalty provisions were in existence between the period w.e.f. 27.11.2017 to 31.12.2017 when the Respondent had violated the provisions of Section 171 (1), the penalty prescribed under Section 171(3A) can not be imposed on the Respondent retrospe...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (5,205)
Company Law (6,921)
Custom Duty (8,300)
DGFT (4,458)
Excise Duty (4,439)
Fema / RBI (4,556)
Finance (4,790)
Income Tax (35,961)
SEBI (3,832)
Service Tax (3,672)

Search Posts by Date

February 2021
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728