State Level Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering, Kerala., Director General Anti-Profiteering, Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs, Versus M\/s. Panasonic India Pvt. Ltd.,
GST
2018 (12) TMI 1403 – NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY – 2019 (20) G. S. T. L. 375 (N. A. P. A.)
NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY – NAPA
Dated:- 24-12-2018
23\/2018
GST
SH. B. N. SHARMA, CHAIRMAN, SH. J. C. CHAUHAN, TECHNICAL MEMBER, MS. R. BHAGYADEVI, TECHNICAL MEMBER, SH. AMAND SHAH, TECHNICAL MEMBER
\nPresent:-
\nMs. A. Shainamol, Additional Commissioner, SGST, Kerala for the Applicant No. 1
\nSh. Anwar Ali T. P. , Additional Commissioner for the Applicant No. 2.
\nORDER
\n1. The present Report dated 27.09.2018, has been received from the Applicant No. 2 i.e. 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 Comm<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n scrutiny of the two invoices issued by the Respondent, it was observed that in the pre-GST era, the said product attracted VAT @ 14.5% and Central Excise Duty @ 12.5% on 65% of abated MRP of the product, in terms of Notification No. 49\/2008 Central Excise (N.T.) dated 24.12.2008. on implementation of the GST w.e.f. 01.07.2017, the GST rate on the said product was fixed at 28%. The pre-GST & post-GST sale invoice-wise details of the applicable tax rate and discounted price (excluding VAT or GST) of the said product supplied by the Respondent, are furnished in the table below:- = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n inamol, Additional Commissioner, SGST, Kerala appeared on behalf of the Applicant No. 1. During the hearing she agreed to the report submitted by the DGAP. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" State Level Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering, Kerala., Director General Anti-Profiteering, Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs, Versus M\/s. Panasonic India Pvt. Ltd.,GST2018 (12) TMI 1403 – NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY – 2019 (20) G. S. T. L. 375 (N. A. P. A.)NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY – NAPADated:- 24-12-201823\/2018 GSTSH. B. N. SHARMA, CHAIRMAN, SH. J. C. … Continue reading “State Level Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering, Kerala., Director General Anti-Profiteering, Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs, Versus M\/s. Panasonic India Pvt. Ltd.,”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-15713","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15713","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=15713"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15713\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=15713"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=15713"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=15713"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\nS.No.
\nDescription of the product supplied
\nPre GST Invoice No. 140217101517 dated 15.06.2017
\nPost GST Invoice No. 14021702034 dated 22.07.2017
\nBase price
\nTotal Tax (Rs)
\nTotal Price (Rs.)
\nBase price (Rs.)
\nGST (Rs.)
\nTotal Price (Rs)
\n1.
\nPanasonic LED TH43E200DX#45 580 (HSN code 85281211)
\n27,428\/-
\n7349\/- (Rs. 2945\/- Central Excise Duty @ 12.5% on 65% of abated MRP of Rs. 36250\/as per Annexure-7) + Rs. 440<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n6. We have carefully examined the report of the DGAP and the documents placed on record and find that the only issue that needs to be dwelled upon in as to whether there is a case of reduction in the rate of tax and whether the provisions of section 171 of CGST Act, 2017 are attracted in the case.
\n7. Perusal of Section 171 of the CGST Act shows that it provides as under:-
\n(1). “Any reduction in rate of tax on any supply of goods or services or the benefit of input tax credit shall be passed on to the recipient by way of commensurate reduction in prices.”
\n8. It is apparent 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 in the Post-GST era has also been increased from 26.79% to 28%, therefore, the allegation of profiteering is<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n