https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403252 The Respondent, a restaurant franchisee, was found to have violated Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 by not passing on the benefit of the GST rate reduction to customers. The Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) determined that the Respondent increased base prices, negating the tax reduction benefit. The Authority upheld the DGAP's findings, directing the Respondent to deposit Rs. 6,85,531/- in Consumer Welfare Funds and reduce prices accordingly. No penalty was imposed under Section 171 (3A) as it was not in effect during the violation period. en-us Fri, 11 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 22 Mar 2025 11:03:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403252 The Respondent, a restaurant franchisee, was found to have violated Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 by not passing on the benefit of the GST rate reduction to customers. The Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) determined that the Respondent increased base prices, negating the tax reduction benefit. The Authority upheld the DGAP's findings, directing the Respondent to deposit Rs. 6,85,531/- in Consumer Welfare Funds and reduce prices accordingly. No penalty was imposed under Section 171 (3A) as it was not in effect during the violation period. Case-Laws GST Fri, 11 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403252