https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427307 NAPA held that respondents contravened section 171 of CGST Act by not passing GST rate reduction benefit from 28% to 18% on three Juvederm products to recipients. Authority rejected netting off methodology, ruling each customer must receive individual benefit. Respondent No. 2 liable for Rs. 28,50,72,358 profiteering, must pass Rs. 61,54,833 to Respondent No. 1 and deposit remaining Rs. 27,89,17,525 in Consumer Welfare Funds with 18% interest. Penalty provisions under section 171(3A) not applicable retrospectively as violation occurred before provision's effective date. en-us Wed, 31 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Apr 2025 10:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427307 NAPA held that respondents contravened section 171 of CGST Act by not passing GST rate reduction benefit from 28% to 18% on three Juvederm products to recipients. Authority rejected netting off methodology, ruling each customer must receive individual benefit. Respondent No. 2 liable for Rs. 28,50,72,358 profiteering, must pass Rs. 61,54,833 to Respondent No. 1 and deposit remaining Rs. 27,89,17,525 in Consumer Welfare Funds with 18% interest. Penalty provisions under section 171(3A) not applicable retrospectively as violation occurred before provision's effective date. Case-Laws GST Wed, 31 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427307