9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (8) TMI 91X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d amount is determined as 1,57,200/- as per the provisions of Rule 133 (1) of the CGST Rules 2017. The Respondent is therefore directed to reduce the prices of his products as per the provisions of Rule 133 (3) (a) of the CGST Rules, 2017, keeping in view the reduction in the rate of tax so that the benefit is passed on to the recipients. Accordingly, the Respondent is required to deposit the profiteered amount of 1,57,200/- along with the interest to be calculated @ 18% from the date when the above amount was collected by him from the recipients till the above amount is deposited in terms of Rule 133 (3) (b) of the CGST Rules, 2017. As per the provisions of Rule 133 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017 this order was required to be passed within a period of 6 months from the date of receipt of the Report furnished by the DGAP under Rule 129 (6) of the above Rules - This order is being passed today in terms of the Notification No. 55/2020-Central Tax dated 27.06.2020 issued by the Government of India Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), Central Board of Indirect Taxes Customs under Section 168 A of the CGST Act, 2017. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as well as furnish all documents in support of his reply. The Respondent was also allowed to inspect the non-confidential evidence/information which formed the basis of the said Notice which the Authorised Representative of the Respondent availed of on 23.07.2019. 5. Applicant No. 1 also was allowed to inspect the non-confidential documents/reply furnished by the Respondent, which he did not avail of. The period of the investigation is from 15.11.2017 to 30.06.2019. 6. In response to the Notice dated 12.07.2019, the Respondent submitted his replies vide letters/e-mails dated 22.07.2019, 23.08.2019, 17.10.2019, 22.10.2019, 13.11.2019 and 11.12.2019, vide which he submitted the following documents/information: (a) GSTR-1 & GSTR-3B returns for the period from November 2017 to June 2019. (b) Details of invoice-wise outward taxable supplies for the period July 2017 to June 2019. However, the Respondent did not make any submissions/ contentions in respect of the alleged profiteering. 7. Based on the above-mentioned documents filed by the Respondent, the DGAP submitted that the main issues for determination were whether the rate of GST on the product supplied by the Respondent wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... base price of this item was compared with the actual selling price of this item sold during post-GST rate reduction i.e. on or after 15.11.2017 as has been illustrated in the table given below: Table (Amount in Rupees) Sr.No. Description Factors Pre Rate Reduction (Before 15.11.2017) Post Rate Reduction (From 15.11.2017) 1. Product Description A DU RA-9V/1 2. Period B B 01.11.2017 to 14.11.2017 3. The total quantity of the item sold C 4 4. Total taxable value D 600.98 5. Average base price (without GST) E=D/C 150.25 6. GST Rate F 28% 18% 7. Commensurate Selling price (post Rate reduction) G=E*1.18 177.29 8. Invoice No. H R-004914 9. Invoice Date I 16.11.2017 10. Total quantity (above invoice) J 2 11. Total Invoice Value K 376.93 12. Actual Selling price (post rate reduction L=K/J 188.46 13. Difference (Profiteering) M=L-G 11.17 14. Final Profiteering N=M*J 22.34 From the above table, it was clear that the Respondent did not reduce the selling price of the "DURA-9V/1" when the GST rate was reduced from 28% to 18% w.e.f. 15.11.2017, vide Notification No. 41/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this Notification and profiteering against each item is shown in the table given below: Table S. No. Item Name Profiteering 1 DURA ULT AA-2 581.93 2 DURA ULT AA4 475.63 3 DURA-9V/1 2879.14 4 DURA-9V/2 7969.91 5 DURA-AA/2 7448.62 6 DURA-AA/4 4109.05 7 DURA-AA/6 69956.26 8 DURA-AA/8 4607.69 9 DURA-AAA/2 4516.55 10 DURA-AAA/4 395.18 11 DURA-AAA/6 46822.87 12 DURA-C/2 4750.62 13 DURA-D/2 2687.10 Total Profiteering 157200.53 13. The DGAP also observed that the Respondent had supplied the product in the state of Rajasthan only. 14. The above Report was considered by this Authority in its meeting held on 24.12.2019 and it was decided to hear the Applicants and the Respondent on 13.01.2020. 15. Two personal hearings were accorded to the parties on 13.01.2020 and 22.01.2020 which were attended by the Respondent. During the course of the hearings, none appeared for the Applicant No. 1 and Sh. Manoj K. Singh, Authorised Representative appeared for the Respondent. 16. The Respondent filed his first written submissions on 11.01.2020 vide which he has accepted the above profiteered amount as computed by the DGAP. The Respondent fu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s established that the Respondent has acted in contravention of the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017, and has not passed on the benefit of reduction in the rate of tax to his recipients by commensurate reduction in the prices. Accordingly, the profiteered amount is determined as ₹ 1,57,200/- as per the provisions of Rule 133 (1) of the CGST Rules 2017. The Respondent is therefore directed to reduce the prices of his products as per the provisions of Rule 133 (3) (a) of the CGST Rules, 2017, keeping in view the reduction in the rate of tax so that the benefit is passed on to the recipients. Accordingly, the Respondent is required to deposit the profiteered amount of ₹ 1,57,200/- along with the interest to be calculated @ 18% from the date when the above amount was collected by him from the recipients till the above amount is deposited in terms of Rule 133 (3) (b) of the CGST Rules, 2017. Since the recipients, in this case, are not identifiable, the Respondent is directed to deposit the amount of profiteering of ₹ 1,57,200/- along with interest in the CWFs of the Central and concerned State Governments as per the provisions of Rule 133 (3) (c) of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
