https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382340 The respondents failed to pass on the benefit of GST rate reduction on sanitary napkins to consumers, leading to profiteering. Respondent No. 1 was directed to deposit the profiteered amount of Rs. 10,77,182.34 into the Consumer Welfare Fund. However, Respondent No. 2 was not found guilty of profiteering due to higher ITC reversal costs. The DGAP's methodology in determining profiteering was deemed valid, and Respondent No. 1 faced a penalty for issuing incorrect invoices. en-us Wed, 26 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Mar 2025 13:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382340 The respondents failed to pass on the benefit of GST rate reduction on sanitary napkins to consumers, leading to profiteering. Respondent No. 1 was directed to deposit the profiteered amount of Rs. 10,77,182.34 into the Consumer Welfare Fund. However, Respondent No. 2 was not found guilty of profiteering due to higher ITC reversal costs. The DGAP's methodology in determining profiteering was deemed valid, and Respondent No. 1 faced a penalty for issuing incorrect invoices. Case-Laws GST Wed, 26 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382340