Rahul Sharma Vs Bajaj Electricals Limited
Date: March 4, 2020
Subject Matter
No profiteering established as the base price of the product was kept unchanged despite the reduction in the rate of tax
Summary
1. In the present case, we observe that the allegation of the Applicant is that the Respondent had increased the MRP of the said product from Rs. 1099/- to Rs. 1405/- or Rs. 1520/- in respect of supplies of the said product and after coming into forc…
1. The present Report dated 06.09.2019, has been received from the Applicant No. 2 i.e. the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after a detailed investigation under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The facts of the case are that an application dated 05.02.2019 was filed before the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering under Rule 128 of the CGST Rul…