https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297880 The Authority directed the DGAP to re-investigate the case under Rule 133 (4) of the CGST Rules, 2017, comparing average pre-rate reduction base prices with actual post-rate reduction base prices of the impacted products. The DGAP confirmed that the Respondent increased base prices post-GST rate reduction without passing on benefits. The total profiteered amount remained at Rs. 3,76,360/-. The Authority found the DGAP's methodology inappropriate and ordered a revised investigation. The Respondent was instructed to cooperate. The order was delayed due to COVID-19, issued under Notification No. 35/2020-Central Tax dated 03.04.2020, with copies to both parties. en-us Fri, 26 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Mar 2025 12:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297880 The Authority directed the DGAP to re-investigate the case under Rule 133 (4) of the CGST Rules, 2017, comparing average pre-rate reduction base prices with actual post-rate reduction base prices of the impacted products. The DGAP confirmed that the Respondent increased base prices post-GST rate reduction without passing on benefits. The total profiteered amount remained at Rs. 3,76,360/-. The Authority found the DGAP's methodology inappropriate and ordered a revised investigation. The Respondent was instructed to cooperate. The order was delayed due to COVID-19, issued under Notification No. 35/2020-Central Tax dated 03.04.2020, with copies to both parties. Case-Laws GST Fri, 26 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297880