https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372633 The case involved an allegation of profiteering by the Respondent on the supply of a particular mattress post-GST implementation. The Directorate General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) found no contravention of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 as there was no tax rate reduction. The Authority dismissed the application, stating the allegation of profiteering was not sustainable. The case was closed with no merit found in the application. en-us Mon, 24 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Feb 2025 10:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372633 The case involved an allegation of profiteering by the Respondent on the supply of a particular mattress post-GST implementation. The Directorate General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) found no contravention of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 as there was no tax rate reduction. The Authority dismissed the application, stating the allegation of profiteering was not sustainable. The case was closed with no merit found in the application. Case-Laws GST Mon, 24 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372633