NO PROFITEERING WHEN BASE PRICE IS CONSTANT & SELLING PRICE REDUCED
By: – Dr. Sanjiv Agarwal
Goods and Services Tax – GST
Dated:- 16-2-2019<\/p>\n
The complaint against profiteering came up recently before the National Anti-profiteering Authority (NAA) in a case involving supply of tiles. In Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering & DGAP, CBIC New Delhi v. Asian Grantio India Ltd., Ahmedabad (2018) 12 TMI 1401; the NAA vide its Order dated 24.12.2018 ordered that where the business entity has duly passed on the benefit of reduction in the tax rate by keeping the base price constant thus reducing the selling price of the products in question, the anti-profiteering provisions contained in Section 171 (1) of the CGST Ta<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Rs.) = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" NO PROFITEERING WHEN BASE PRICE IS CONSTANT & SELLING PRICE REDUCEDBy: – Dr. Sanjiv Agarwal Goods and Services Tax – GSTDated:- 16-2-2019 The complaint against profiteering came up recently before the National Anti-profiteering Authority (NAA) in a case involving supply of tiles. In Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering & DGAP, CBIC New Delhi v. … Continue reading “NO PROFITEERING WHEN BASE PRICE IS CONSTANT & SELLING PRICE REDUCED”<\/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-16797","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16797","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=16797"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16797\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=16797"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=16797"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=16797"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n1101171B\/G01063 dated 30.08.2017
\n28%
\n743.95
\n110\/1716\/G02733 dated 28.11.2017
\n18%
\n743.95
\n–
\n1110\/1716\/G01063 dated 28.11.2017
\n28%
\n650.93
\n1110\/1716\/G02733 dated 28.11.2017
\n18%
\n650.92
\n-0.01
\nThe DGAP observed that the business entity had not increased the per unit base price (excluding GST) of both the products after GST rate reduction w.e.f. 15. 11.2017, which were ₹ 743.95 and ₹ 650.93 in both the periods. Thus, though the GST rate was reduced from 28% to 18% w.e.f. 15.11.2017, the absence of any upward change in the per unit base price (excluding GST) confirmed that the allegation of profiteering by the was not sustainable.
\nThe NAA took up the matter to examine whether there was any reduction in the GST rate <\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n