https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372833 The case involved an allegation of profiteering against the Respondent for not passing on the benefit of a tax rate reduction from 28% to 18% on specific products. After investigation, it was found that despite the tax rate reduction, the base prices of the products remained constant, indicating no increase post-tax rate revision. As a result, the Respondent was not found to have engaged in profiteering by not passing on the benefit to consumers. The application was dismissed, concluding that there was no contravention of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017. en-us Thu, 27 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Feb 2025 10:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372833 The case involved an allegation of profiteering against the Respondent for not passing on the benefit of a tax rate reduction from 28% to 18% on specific products. After investigation, it was found that despite the tax rate reduction, the base prices of the products remained constant, indicating no increase post-tax rate revision. As a result, the Respondent was not found to have engaged in profiteering by not passing on the benefit to consumers. The application was dismissed, concluding that there was no contravention of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017. Case-Laws GST Thu, 27 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372833