News Update

Requisite Checks for Appeals - Court FeeI-T - Members of Settlement Commission appointed amongst persons of integrity & outstanding ability & having special knowledge in/experience of direct taxes; unfortunate that SETCOM's orders are challenged without establishing them to be contrary to law or lacking in jurisdiction: HCThe 'taxing' story of Malabar Parota, calories notwithstanding!I-T - Unless a case of bias, fraud or malice is alleged, then Department cannot assail SETCOM's order: HCCentre allows export of 99,150 MT onion to Bangladesh, UAE, Bhutan, Bahrain, Mauritius & LankaI-T- Re-assessment vide Faceless Assessment u/s 144 of I-T Act, is barred by Section 31 of IBC 2016, which is binding upon all creditors of corporate debtor: HCPension Portals of all Pension Disbursing Banks to be integratedI-T- Resolution Plan under IBC, once approved, nullifies any claims pertaining to a period prior to approval of said Plan: HC‘Flash Mob’ drive in London seeks support for PM ModiI-T - Once assessee has produced all supporting documents which includes profit & loss account, balance sheet and copy of ITR of creditors, then identity & creditworthiness is established: ITATTo deliver political message, Pak Sessions judge abducted and then released: KPKI-T - Assessee shall provide monthly figures to arrive at year-end average of deposits received from members, interest paid thereon & investments made in FDs from external funds, for calculating Sec 80P deduction: ITATMaersk to invest USD 600 mn in Nigerian seaport infraI-T - It shall not be necessary to issue authorization u/s 132 separately in name of each person where authorization has been issued mentioning thereon more than one person: ITATChile announces 3-day national mourning after three police officers killedI-T- Since facts have not yet been verified by AO, issue of CSR expenditure can be remanded back for reconsideration: ITATIndian Coast Guard intercepts Pakistani boat with 86 kg drugs worth Rs 600 CroreI-T - Failure to substantiate cash deposits by employer during festival will not automatically lead to additions u/s 68, in absence of any opportunity of hearing: ITATGold watch of richest Titanic pax auctioned for USD 1.46 millionGST - There is no material on record to show as to why the registration is sought to be cancelled retrospectively - Order cannot be sustained: HCIraq is latest to criminalise same-sex marriage with max 15 yrs of jail-termGST - SCN does not put the petitioner to notice that the registration is liable to be cancelled retrospectively, therefore, petitioner did not have any opportunity to object to the same - Order modified: HCUndersea quake of 6.5 magnitude strikes Java; No tsunami alert issuedGST - A taxpayer's registration can be cancelled with retrospective effect only where such consequences are intended and are warranted: HCZelensky says Russia shelling oil facilities to choke supply to EuropeGST - Rule 86A - Single Judge was correct in relegating appellant to his alternate remedy of replying to SCNs and getting matter adjudicated by adjudicating authority: HC20 army men killed in blasts at army base in CambodiaST -Simultaneous filing of refund applications by service provider/KSFE and the service recipients/petitioners for same amount - Applications ought not to be rejected on technical issue when applications filed in time: HC3 Indian women from Gujarat died in mega SUV accident in USST - Court cannot examine the issue, which is only a question of fact and evidence and not of the law - Petition dismissed: HCJNU switches to NET in place of entrance test for PhD admissionsCX - Department ought not to have waited for rebate proceedings to get finalized and ought to have issued SCN within normal period: CESTATGST - fake invoice - Patanjali served Rs 27 Cr demand noticeCus - As Section 149 prior to its amendment, does not prescribe any time limit, the Board vide Circular 36/2010 cannot impose a time limit so as to decline the request for amendment of shipping bill: CESTAT
 
GST - No profiteering made on sale of 'Hara Bhara Kabab Sub' - respondent had increased base price to make good loss which occurred due to denial of ITC post GST rate reduction: NAA

 

By TIOL News Service

NEW DELHI, SEPT 28, 2018: A whole gamut of goods/services seem to be affected by the Profiteering bug.

Earlier cases related to purchase of cars, Basmati rice, lifts, Almirah, Vaseline, residential flats, Maybelline FIT Me foundation.

The present case concerns "Hara Bhara Kabab Sub" (product).

The applicant alleges that the Respondent has not passed on the benefit of reduction in the rate of GST in restaurant service when he had purchased 6 such products.

It is further alleged that the respondent has increased the base price of the product from Rs.130/- to Rs.145/- when the GST had been reduced from 18% to 5%. Inasmuch as the respondent had indulged in profiteering in contravention of the provisions of section 171 of the CGST Act.

The DGAP submitted his report and the applicant was called for hearing on 29.05.2018. The respondent did not appear.

However, M/s Subway Systems India Pvt. Ltd., the owners of the Subway brand and which had appointed the respondent as its franchisee appeared for the hearing and submitted that they worked on franchisee model and no consideration was taken from the respondent except the royalty on the net turnover; that M/s Subway was not involved in fixing the price of the products and it was solely the call of the franchisee to fix the prices; that no ITC was being passed on by M/s Subway as the franchisee was free to buy the raw material from the local sources; that only the ingredients and the products to be served were decided by M/s Subway.

The DGAP was also directed to file a reply on the ITC aspect of the pre and post GST era and to extend the investigation to the other outlets and products of M/s Subway. The DGAP informed that GST on restaurant service had been reduced from 18% (with ITC) to 5% (without ITC) w.e.f 15.11.2017 and, therefore, investigation could not be conducted for the period prior to 15.11.2017 and that there were almost 600 outlets of M/s Subway all over the country and without separately investigating each one of them, no comments could be offered.

The respondent appeared on 13 August and informed that Rs.452/- which was alleged to have been charged from the customers on 14.11.2017 (wrongly indicated as 14.11.2018) was due to the system error and the respondent had no intention of overcharging; that the rates of the impugned goods were increased due to denial of ITC and the DGAP had not alleged any profiteering on this behalf.

The National Anti-Profiteering Authority observed that -

+ GST on restaurant service had been reduced vide notification 46/2017-CTR from 18% to 5% and ITC had been disallowed;

+ That the applicant had purchased the goods from respondent who had increased the base price from Rs.130/- to Rs.145/-

+ That the respondent had increased the base price to make good the loss which had occurred due to denial of ITC post GST rate reduction;

+ That the respondent had increased the average base price by 12.14% to neutralize the denial of ITC of 11.80% and such increase is commensurate with the increase in the cost of the product on account of denial of ITC;

+ Allegation of not passing on the benefit of rate reduction is not established against the respondent;

+ As regards the issue of alleged profiteering of Rs.452/- made on the supply of products on 14.11.2017, same cannot be treated as profiteering in terms of section 171 of the Act as there was no rate reduction on 14.11.2017 but the same had occurred w.e.f. 15.11.2017 only.

Concluding that the respondent had not contravened the provisions of section 171 of the Act, the application was dismissed as being bereft of any merits.

(See 2018-TIOL-08-NAA-GST)


 RECENT DISCUSSION(S) POST YOUR COMMENTS
   
 
Sub: subway to profiteer


please note that case has not been fought properly.
there is a case of profiteering if goods sold on 15.11.2017 was from the stock dt 14.11 or prior to that.where it carried itc benefit.

Posted by Navin Khandelwal
 

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.


Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.