Anti-profiteering under GST requires an actual tax rate reduction or ITC benefit on the relevant supply, which was absent here.

Section 171 of the CGST Act applies only where there is an actual reduction in the tax rate or benefit of input tax credit on the relevant supply, followed by a duty to pass on the corresponding benefit by reducing price. The product was found classified under HSN 8507 60 00 and taxed at 18% both before and after the impugned notification, so no change in tax incidence occurred on the supply of the power bank. As there was no reduction in the applicable rate, the precondition for anti-profiteering was absent, no profiteering was established, and the allegation was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondent was liable under section 171 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for not passing on any benefit of reduction in tax rate on the supply of the power bank, and whether any profiteering was made out.

Analysis: The product was found to have been classified under HSN 8507 60 00 and taxed at 18% both before and after the impugned notification. The alleged rate-reduction notification did not alter the tax incidence on the supply in question. Since there was no reduction in the rate of tax applicable to the respondent's supply, the prerequisite for invoking anti-profiteering provisions was absent. The question of classification was treated as outside the scope of the proceedings.

Conclusion: No violation of section 171 was established and no profiteering was found.

Final Conclusion: The allegation of anti-profiteering was rejected and the proceedings were dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: Section 171 is attracted only when there is an actual reduction in the rate of tax or benefit of input tax credit on the relevant supply, which must then be passed on by commensurate reduction in price.

---