<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2019 (12) TMI 219 - NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389336</link>
    <description>The case involved an analysis of the Respondent&#039;s compliance with Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 regarding passing on Input Tax Credit benefits. The investigation revealed no additional benefit post-GST implementation, with no reduction in tax rates. The Authority agreed with the findings, dismissing the Applicant&#039;s claim of non-compliance. The allegation of profiteering was also refuted based on a lower ITC-to-turnover ratio post-GST. The Respondent&#039;s issuance of a credit note was deemed unsubstantiated. Ultimately, the case did not warrant Anti-Profiteering provisions, leading to the dismissal of the Applicant&#039;s application.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2025 16:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=596368" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (12) TMI 219 - NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389336</link>
      <description>The case involved an analysis of the Respondent&#039;s compliance with Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 regarding passing on Input Tax Credit benefits. The investigation revealed no additional benefit post-GST implementation, with no reduction in tax rates. The Authority agreed with the findings, dismissing the Applicant&#039;s claim of non-compliance. The allegation of profiteering was also refuted based on a lower ITC-to-turnover ratio post-GST. The Respondent&#039;s issuance of a credit note was deemed unsubstantiated. Ultimately, the case did not warrant Anti-Profiteering provisions, leading to the dismissal of the Applicant&#039;s application.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389336</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>