The National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA) directed the recomputation of the profiteering amount of the Portronics Digital.
In the case of Rahul Sharma vs. M/s. Portronics Digital, the National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA) observed that the respondent has not submitted the supply chain wise data to the Director-General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) during an investigation. So the respondent company was directed to coordinate with the authority in the investigation.
In the applicant filed an application against the respondent namely Portronics Digital Private Limited before the standing committee on Anti-Profiteering, wherein the respondent was alleged to have profiteered the supply of the Power Bank “Portronics Power Slice 10” and the applicant has also alleged that the respondent has did not reduced the selling price of the power bank.
However, the respondent has violated Section 171 of the Central Goods and Service Tax (CGST) Act, 2017 which speaks of benefits of input tax credit should have been passed on to the recipient by way of commensurate reduction in prices.
The Director-General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) undertook the investigation, however, the supply chain wise data was not provided.
The National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA) comprising a Chairman, B.N. Sharma; Technical Members, J.C. Chauhan, and Amand Shah held that the respondent has not submitted the supply chain wise data to the Director-General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) during an investigation. So the respondent company was directed to coordinate with the authority in the investigation.
Therefore, the Authority directed the Director-General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) recomputation of the profiteering amount of the Portronics Digital. And directed the respondent company to co-operate with the investigation. Also, the contention of the applicant will be heard after the recomputation is undertaken and the report is submitted by the Director-General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP).
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment
