https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401986 The Respondent did not violate Section 171(1) of the CGST Act, 2017. The application alleging profiteering was dismissed as the tax rate reduction and absence of additional ITC benefits were appropriately passed on to Applicant No. 1. The project began post-GST implementation, precluding a comparison of pre-GST and post-GST prices. The Respondent's compliance with passing on tax benefits and absence of additional ITC benefits led to the dismissal of the profiteering allegations. en-us Wed, 09 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Mar 2025 16:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401986 The Respondent did not violate Section 171(1) of the CGST Act, 2017. The application alleging profiteering was dismissed as the tax rate reduction and absence of additional ITC benefits were appropriately passed on to Applicant No. 1. The project began post-GST implementation, precluding a comparison of pre-GST and post-GST prices. The Respondent's compliance with passing on tax benefits and absence of additional ITC benefits led to the dismissal of the profiteering allegations. Case-Laws GST Wed, 09 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401986