Principal Bench of GSTAT to examine profiteering of ITC due to reduction in rate

Principal Bench of the GSTAT to examine whether input tax credits benefit due to reduction in rate passed on to the consumers 

Section 171 of the CGST Act 2017 (the Act) empowers the Central Government to take anti-profiteering measures. It provides that any reduction in rate of tax on any supply of goods or services or the benefit of input tax credit shall be passed on to the recipient by way of commensurate reduction in prices. It further provides that the Central Government may, on recommendations of the Council, constitute an Authority, or empower an existing Authority to examine whether input tax credits availed by any registered person or the reduction in the tax rate have actually resulted in a commensurate reduction in the price of the goods or services or both supplied by him.

Section 109 of the Act further provides that the Government shall, on the recommendations of the Council, establish an Appellate Tribunal known as the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) inter alia for conducting an examination or adjudicating the cases of anti-profiteering as per section 171 and such examination shall be examined or adjudicated only by the Principal Bench of GSTAT.

Accordingly, the Central Government, on the recommendations of the Goods and Services Tax Council has issued Notification No. 18/2024 – Central Tax dated 30.09.2024 to notify the Principal Bench of the GSTAT w.e.f. 01.10.2024 to examine whether input tax credits availed by any registered person or the reduction in the tax rate have actually resulted in a commensurate reduction in the price of the goods or services or both supplied by that registered person.

Also, the Central Government has issued Notification No. 19/2024 – Central Tax dated 30.09.2024 to provide that from 1st day of April, 2025 the Authority constituted u/s 171(2) shall not accept any request for examination as to whether input tax credits availed by any registered person or the reduction in the tax rate have actually resulted in a commensurate reduction in the price of the goods or services or both supplied by that registered person.

• AO not justified in rejecting registered valuer’s report without reference to DVO – ITAT
• FCRA specifies list of 105 purposes to be selected for which registration is applied
• Withholding tax u/s 40(a)(i) not required on cost-to-cost reimbursement made to parent company
• Temporarily blocking public access to Telegram App not disproportionate – Delhi High Court
• High Court explains the meaning of term ‘enterprise’ appearing in section 80IA