Anti-profiteering provisions do not apply to franchise royalty and advertisement charges absent tax reduction, pricing control, or unmet pass-through benefit.

Anti-profiteering under Section 171 of the CGST Act was held inapplicable to royalty and advertisement charges in a franchisee-franchisor model where franchisees independently operated outlets, fixed sale prices, and bore operating costs. The franchisor merely collected contractually agreed royalty and advertisement fees on net sales, with no shown control over customer pricing, supply of goods, or retention of input tax credit. As the tax rate on those services had not been reduced and no passing on of a tax benefit was established, no profiteering was found and the proceedings were dropped.

---

---

Issues: Whether the anti-profiteering provisions applied to the royalty and advertisement charges collected by the franchisor, and whether the franchisor had profiteered by fixing outlet prices or by passing on a tax benefit to franchisees.

Analysis: The investigation found that the arrangement was a franchisee-franchisor model under which the franchisees independently operated the restaurants, fixed their own sale prices, and bore the costs and taxes of running the outlets. The franchisor only collected royalty and advertisement charges on net sales at contractually agreed rates. There was no clause showing that the franchisor controlled product prices, supplied the goods, or retained input tax credit. The rate of tax on royalty services and advertisement services had not been reduced, and the transaction did not involve any supply by the franchisor to customers that would attract a duty to pass on commensurate price reduction under the anti-profiteering rule.

Conclusion: Section 171 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was not applicable to the royalty and advertisement charges, and no profiteering was established.

Final Conclusion: The proceedings under the anti-profiteering framework were dropped because the essential conditions for invocation of Section 171 were absent.

Ratio Decidendi: Anti-profiteering liability arises only when there is a reduction in tax rate or benefit of input tax credit that must be passed on by commensurate reduction in price of the relevant supply; where neither such tax reduction nor control over customer pricing is shown, Section 171 is not attracted.

---