2018 (12) TMI 1402 – NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY – 2019 (20) G. S. T. L. 377 (N. A. P. A.) – Profiteering – supply of Peps Spring Koil Bornell Normal Maroon 75x60x6″ Mattress – benefit of reduction in the rate of tax not passed – Section 171 of CGST Act, 2017 – whether there is a case of reduction in the rate of tax and whether the provision of section 171 of CGST Act, 2017 are attracted in the case? – Held that:- It is clear from the perusal of the facts of the case that there was no reduction in the rate of tax on the above product w.e.f. 01-07-2017 and that the rate of tax on the said product has increased from 14.5% (2% CST + 12.5% Excise) to 28% and therefore the allegation of profiteering is not sustainable in terms of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017.
–
Application dismissed. – Case No. 22/2018 Dated:- 24-12-2018 – SH. B. N. SHARMA, CHAIRMAN, SH. J. C. CHAUHAN, TECHNICAL MEMBER, MS. R. BHAGYADEVI, TECHNICAL MEMBER, SH. AMAND SHAH, TECHNICAL MEMBER Ms. A. Shainamo
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Act, 2017 In this regard, The Kerala State Screening Committee had relied on four invoices issued by the Respondent, two invoices were dated 30.06.2017 & 15.06.2017 (Pre-CST) and two invoices were dated 21.07.2017 & 09.08.2017 (Post-CST). 2. The above reference was examined by the Standing Committee on Anti-Profiteering and was further referred to the DGAP vide minutes of it's meeting dated 02.07.2018 for detailed investigation under Rule 129 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017. 3. The DGAP has stated in his report dated 28.09.2018 that in the pre-GST era, the applicable Central Sales Tax (CST) on the product 'Peps Spring Koil Bornell Normal Maroon 75x60x6" Mattress" was being levied @ 2% and Central Excise Duty @ 12.5%. In the post GST era the rate of tax was levied @ 28%. Details of the invoices issued by Respondent are as per the table given below:- S.No. Description of the product supplied Pre GST rate Post GST rate Difference (in Rs.) Invoice No.& Date CST R
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ra, the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 were not contravened and hence the allegation of profiteering by the Respondent was not established. 5. The above report was considered by the Authority in it's meeting held on 03.10.2018 and it was decided that since there was no complainant/other applicant in this case, the Kerala Screening Committee be asked to appear before the Authority. On 31.10.2018, Ms. A. Shainamol, Additional Commissioner, SGST, Kerala appeared on behalf of the Applicant No. 1. During the hearing she agreed with the report submitted by the DGAP. 6. We have carefully examined the report of the DGAP and the documents placed on record and find that the only issue that need to be dwelled upon in as to whether there is a case of reduction in the rate of tax and whether the provision of section 171 of CGST Act, 2017 are attracted in the case. 7. Perusal of Section 171 of the CGST Act shows that it provides as under:- (1). Any reduction in rate of tax on an
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =