https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778042 GSTAT New Delhi (AT) found that a hotel accommodation service provider failed to pass on GST rate reduction for 01.10.2019-30.06.2020, attracting Section 171 proceedings. The bench invoked the HC principle of a rebuttable presumption that rate cuts must yield commensurate price reductions; the respondent offered no cogent evidence to rebut that presumption. The respondent was held to have profiteered Rs. 31,28,631, to be recovered with 18% p.a. interest from 01.10.2019 until realisation and deposited equally into the Centre/State Consumer Welfare Fund. en-us Tue, 02 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Sep 2025 09:50:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778042 GSTAT New Delhi (AT) found that a hotel accommodation service provider failed to pass on GST rate reduction for 01.10.2019-30.06.2020, attracting Section 171 proceedings. The bench invoked the HC principle of a rebuttable presumption that rate cuts must yield commensurate price reductions; the respondent offered no cogent evidence to rebut that presumption. The respondent was held to have profiteered Rs. 31,28,631, to be recovered with 18% p.a. interest from 01.10.2019 until realisation and deposited equally into the Centre/State Consumer Welfare Fund. Case-Laws GST Tue, 02 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778042