Kerala State Level Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering, Director General Anti-Profiteering, Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs, Versus M/s. Lorenzo Vitrified Tiles Pvt. Ltd.
GST
2018 (12) TMI 1601 – NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY – 2019 (20) G. S. T. L. 386 (N. A. P. A.)
NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY – NAPA
Dated:- 27-12-2018
Case No. 27/2018
GST
SH. B.N. SHARMA, CHAIRMAN, SH. J. C. CHAUHAN, TECHNICAL MEMBER, MS. R. BHAGYADEVI, TECHNICAL MEMBER
Present:-
Smt. A. Shainamol, Additional Commissioner, SGST, Kerala for the Applicant No. 1
Sh. Anwar Ali T.P., Additional Commissioner for the Applicant No.
ORDER
1. The present report dated 28.09.2018, has been received from the Directorate General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after detailed investigation under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the case are that the Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering vide the minutes of it'
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
rt dated 28.09.2018 has stated that after scrutiny of the two invoices issued by the Respondent, it was observed that in the pre-GST era, the applicable tax on the product “Mirror Series Tiles” was CST @ 2% and Central Excise Duty @ 12.5% on 55% of the MRP. On implementation of the GST w.e.f. 01.07.2017, the GST rate on the said product was fixed at 28% which was reduced to 18% w.e.f 15.11.2017. The DGAP has further observed that no sale invoice issued by the Respondent after the reduction of GST rate from 28% to 18% w.e.f. 15.11.2017, has been examined by the Kerala State Screening Committee. The invoice dated 18.04.2017, relied on by the Kerala State Screening Committee, was actually issued in the pre-GST era. Further, it was also intimated by The DGAP that in the absence of any invoice issued post 15.11.2017 when the GST rate on the said product was reduced from 28% to 18%, it was not possible to compare the pre-rate revision and post-rate revision actual selling prices. Therefore,
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
96
GST
I
–
28%
Total Tax (in Rs.)
J=D+H or I
44.77
86.8
Total Tax in terms of percentage of Base Price
L=(J/E)*100
14.44%
28%
4. Conclusively, The DGAP has submitted that as there was no reduction in the tax rate of the said product which was increased from 14.44% to 28% as could be seen from the above table and also the Respondent did not increase the per unit price of the product excluding tax, the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 were not contravened and the allegation of profiteering made by the Respondent was not established. The DGAP has also stated that though the tax rate was reduced from 28% to 18% w.e.f. 15.11.2017, no supporting documents were provided to prove that the reduction in rate of tax was not passed on to the recipient.
5. The above report was considered by the Authority in its meeting held on 03.10.2018 and it was decided that as there was no private applicant, the Kerala Screening Committee should be as
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
price (excluding tax) of the above product and therefore the allegation of profiteering is not established.
8. Though the rate of tax has been reduced from 28% to 18% w.e.f. 14.11.2017 the Kerala Screening Committee has failed to produce any invoice and has not examined any documents to establish that the benefit of tax reduction has not been passed on by the Respondent to the recipient hence DGAP has rightly observed that no supporting documents or invoices of the product 'Mirror Series Tiles' for the period post 15.11.2017 have been either examined or presented before the Standing Committee. Hence the allegation that the benefit of rate reduction has not been passed on is not sustained.
9. Based on the above facts it is clear that the Respondent has not contravened the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 either on implementation of the GST w.e.f. 01.07.2017 or w.e.f. 14.11.2017 after the introduction of GST rate reduction and hence there is no merit in the application f
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =