Anti-profiteering presumption is rebuttable where pricing changes reflect market forces and raw material costs, requiring fresh investigation.

In anti-profiteering proceedings under Section 171 of the CGST Act, evidence that pricing changes were driven by raw material cost fluctuations, COGS variation and market forces had to be fairly examined. The Tribunal noted that the anti-profiteering presumption is rebuttable, and material documents relied on by the respondent could not be ignored at the investigative stage. As the additional documents and explanations were not properly considered, the DGAP report was not accepted and the matter was remanded for fresh investigation from the beginning.

---

---

Issues: Whether the DGAP's report could be accepted in the light of the respondent's documents concerning raw material cost and market conditions, and whether the matter required remand for fresh investigation.

Analysis: The proceeding arose under the anti-profiteering framework in Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017. The respondent produced material to show that changes in prices were influenced by raw material cost fluctuations, COGS variations, and market forces, and contended that these documents had not been properly appreciated in the investigation. The Tribunal found that such material could not be ignored at the investigative stage and that the anti-profiteering presumption remains rebuttable. In these circumstances, the earlier report was not treated as fit for acceptance without a fresh examination of the additional documents and claims.

Conclusion: The matter was held fit for reinvestigation from the beginning, and the DGAP's report was set aside with a remand for fresh investigation.

Ratio Decidendi: In anti-profiteering proceedings, evidence showing price changes driven by market forces and raw material costs must be fairly examined, because the presumption of non-passing of benefit is rebuttable and may require fresh investigation when material documents were not properly considered.

---