https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372974 The respondent was alleged to have profiteered by not passing on tax reduction benefits on certain car models post-GST implementation. The Directorate General of Anti-Profiteering found no reduction in tax rates but an increase from 15.63% to 29%. Analysis revealed the respondent adjusted prices post-GST, leading to no contravention of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017. The Kerala Screening Committee agreed, resulting in the dismissal of the applicant's claim against the respondent. en-us Wed, 02 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Jan 2019 06:40:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372974 The respondent was alleged to have profiteered by not passing on tax reduction benefits on certain car models post-GST implementation. The Directorate General of Anti-Profiteering found no reduction in tax rates but an increase from 15.63% to 29%. Analysis revealed the respondent adjusted prices post-GST, leading to no contravention of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017. The Kerala Screening Committee agreed, resulting in the dismissal of the applicant's claim against the respondent. Case-Laws GST Wed, 02 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372974