https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92352 The AT held that the Respondent engaged in profiteering under Section 171, CGST Act, by failing to pass on GST rate reductions effective 01.10.2019; the statutory rebuttable presumption that reduced tax rates require commensurate price reductions was not successfully rebutted. The Respondent's claim of COVID-related additional costs was found unsubstantiated and after-the-fact. The AT directed recovery of Rs. 31,28,631 with interest at 18% p.a. from 01.10.2019 until realization, and ordered deposit of the realized amount into the Consumer Welfare Fund to be apportioned equally between the Centre and States. en-us Tue, 09 Sep 2025 08:38:59 +0530 Tue, 09 Sep 2025 08:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92352 The AT held that the Respondent engaged in profiteering under Section 171, CGST Act, by failing to pass on GST rate reductions effective 01.10.2019; the statutory rebuttable presumption that reduced tax rates require commensurate price reductions was not successfully rebutted. The Respondent's claim of COVID-related additional costs was found unsubstantiated and after-the-fact. The AT directed recovery of Rs. 31,28,631 with interest at 18% p.a. from 01.10.2019 until realization, and ordered deposit of the realized amount into the Consumer Welfare Fund to be apportioned equally between the Centre and States. Highlights GST Tue, 09 Sep 2025 08:38:59 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92352