https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402581 The High Court of Delhi determined that the Respondent violated Section 171(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 by not passing on the benefit of a GST rate reduction to consumers, amounting to Rs. 10,79,813.28. The Anti-Profiteering Authority found the Respondent guilty of profiteering and collecting excess amounts from consumers, leading to penalty proceedings under Section 122(1)(i) of the CGST Act, 2017. However, as the penalty provisions under Section 171(3A) of the Finance Act, 2019 were not applicable retrospectively, no penalty was imposed on the Respondent for the violation of Section 171(1). en-us Fri, 11 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 22 Mar 2025 11:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402581 The High Court of Delhi determined that the Respondent violated Section 171(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 by not passing on the benefit of a GST rate reduction to consumers, amounting to Rs. 10,79,813.28. The Anti-Profiteering Authority found the Respondent guilty of profiteering and collecting excess amounts from consumers, leading to penalty proceedings under Section 122(1)(i) of the CGST Act, 2017. However, as the penalty provisions under Section 171(3A) of the Finance Act, 2019 were not applicable retrospectively, no penalty was imposed on the Respondent for the violation of Section 171(1). Case-Laws GST Fri, 11 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402581