https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364182 The Authority dismissed the application alleging profiteering against the Respondent and the Supplier concerning a purchase transaction. It was found that the Supplier did not engage in profiteering as the base price remained consistent despite changes in GST rates. The Authority emphasized the Respondent's role as a marketplace facilitator and not the Supplier, determining no violation of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017. The case underscored the importance of efficient refund processes for excess taxes following GST rate variations, leading to the direction for audits of major e-platforms to ensure compliance with GST refund regulations. en-us Wed, 18 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 Feb 2025 14:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364182 The Authority dismissed the application alleging profiteering against the Respondent and the Supplier concerning a purchase transaction. It was found that the Supplier did not engage in profiteering as the base price remained consistent despite changes in GST rates. The Authority emphasized the Respondent's role as a marketplace facilitator and not the Supplier, determining no violation of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017. The case underscored the importance of efficient refund processes for excess taxes following GST rate variations, leading to the direction for audits of major e-platforms to ensure compliance with GST refund regulations. Case-Laws GST Wed, 18 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364182