GST profiteering from additional input tax credit requires passing on the benefit, with 18% interest payable on delayed refund.

Additional input tax credit in the post-GST period can trigger profiteering liability where the supplier retains the resulting benefit instead of passing it on through a commensurate price reduction. The document states that a higher credit-to-purchase-value ratio was used to quantify the excess amount payable to buyers, with the profiteered sum computed from the differential and the relevant sales base. It further notes that interest is payable at 18% per annum from the date of collection until refund under Rule 133(3)(b), while penalty is avoided where the amount is deposited or refunded within the statutory period under the proviso to Section 171(3A).

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the supplier derived and retained benefit of additional input tax credit in the post-GST period thereby engaging in profiteering under Section 171 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017; (ii) Whether penalty and interest are exigible for such profiteering and, if so, the applicable quantification and temporal scope.

Issue (i): Whether the supplier derived and retained benefit of additional input tax credit in the post-GST period thereby engaging in profiteering under Section 171 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis: Comparative computation of ratio of credit availed to purchase value for pre-GST and post-GST periods shows an increase of 4.41 percentage points. Applying that increase to the post-GST purchase value and prorating over the sold area produced a quantified excess realization. Documentary evidence and statutory auditor-certified computations supporting the figures were uncontroverted, and the supplier unqualifiedly accepted the quantified finding and produced evidence of refunds to buyers.

Conclusion: The supplier engaged in profiteering by retaining the benefit of additional input tax credit; the profiteered amount pending to be passed on is quantified as Rs. 6,53,861 (inclusive of GST).

Issue (ii): Whether penalty and interest are exigible for such profiteering and, if so, the applicable quantification and temporal scope.

Analysis: Section 171(3A) prescribes penalty for failure to pass on benefit but contains a proviso exempting penalty where the amount is deposited within thirty days of the determination order; the relevant period of contravention is July 1, 2017 to December 31, 2019. Rule 133(3)(b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 prescribes return of the not-passed-on amount with interest at 18% per annum from date of collection until date of refund. The supplier has refunded the amount to eligible buyers; the computations of interest are guided by Rule 133(3)(b) as compensatory restitution for the time value of money.

Conclusion: Penalty under Section 171(3A) is not imposable in view of compliance with the proviso (deposit/refund within the statutory period), but interest at 18% per annum is payable from the respective dates of collection until the date of refund in accordance with Rule 133(3)(b).

Final Conclusion: The determination that profiteering occurred and the quantified restitutive obligation, together with the direction to refund the outstanding profiteered amount with interest at 18% per annum to eligible buyers, is confirmed; penalty is not imposed due to compliance with the statutory proviso.

Ratio Decidendi: Where additional input tax credit results in a measurable increase in the credit-to-purchase-value ratio, the supplier must pass on the resultant benefit by commensurate reduction in price; failure to do so gives rise to a restitutive liability quantified by applying the differential credit ratio to the relevant base and, under Rule 133(3)(b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, attracts interest at 18% per annum from date of collection until refund, while penalty under Section 171(3A) is avoided if the amount is deposited within thirty days of the order of determination.

---