Prima facie, Director General of Anti Profiteering had no suo motu power to issue a notice requiring an assessee to submit information on products except the complained Product.

RECKITT BENCKISER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. UNION OF INDIA-(GST HC Cases)

Assessee Anti-profiteering measure — Order of National Anti-Profiteering Authority — Power of DGAP to seek information — Acting on complaint alleging profiteering against one of products of assessee, National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAPA) had ordered an inquiry — However, Director General of Anti Profiteering (DGAP) had by impugned notice sought information on all products of assessee — Assessee challenged said notice on ground that without there being a report of DGAP on complained product followed by an order of NAPA in terms of Rule 133(5)(a) of the CGST Rules, 2017 DGAP could not suo motu issue a notice requiring assessee to submit information on all its products — Held, assessee had made out a prima facie case for grant of limited interim relief — Till next date, assessee will not be required to furnish information to DGAP pursuant to impugned notice other than information pertaining to complained product — However, NAPA’s inquiry as far as complained Product was concerned will proceed in accordance with law — Interim relief granted.

CM APPL. 32130/2019 (Exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

W.P.(C) 7743/2019 and CM APPL. 32129/2019 (Stay)

2. Notice. Mr. Asheesh Jain, Central Govt. Standing Counsel accepts notice for Respondent No.1 and Mr. Harpreet Singh, Senior Standing Counsel for Respondents 2 and 3.

3. Replies be filed within three weeks. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed by the next date.

4. It is pointed out by Mr. P. Chidambaram, learned Senior Counsel for Petitioner, that the National Anti Profiteering Authority has ordered an inquiry as regards one of the products of the Petitioner i.e. Dettol HW Liquid Original 900 ml (‘Complained Product’). The grievance of the Petitioner is that the Director General of Anti Profiteering (DGAP) has by the impugned notice dated 8th/9th April, 2019 sought information on all products of the Petitioner. In this context, he has referred to the recent amendment by which Sub-Rule 5 (a) has been inserted after Sub-Rule 4 in Rule 133 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules 2017 (‘CGST Rules’) which contemplates the NAPA, for reasons to be recorded in writing, and that too after receipt of the report of the DGAP on the Complained Product, to require the DGAP to cause ‘investigation and inquiry with regard to such other goods or services or both’ in accordance with the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act). It is the case of the Petitioner that without there being a report of the DGAP on the complained product followed by an order of NAPA in terms of Rule 133 (5) (a) of the CGST Rules, the DGAP cannot suo motu issue a notice requiring the Petitioner to submit information on all its products which are approximately 3500 in number.

6. The Court is of the view that the Petitioner has made out a prima facie case for granted of limited interim relief. It is directed that, till the next date,it will not be required to furnish information to the DGAP pursuant to the impugned notice other than information pertaining to the Complained Product. It is, however, clarified that the NAPA’s inquiry as far as the Complained Product is concerned will proceed in accordance with law.

7. List on 22nd August, 2019.

8. Copy of this order be given dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.

S. MURALIDHAR, J.

TALWANT SINGH, J.

JULY 19, 2019

Similar Ripples

Rule - 133, Order of the Authority (CGST Rules, 2017)

Questions

There is no question

Prima facie, Director General of Anti Profiteering had no suo motu power to issue a notice requiring an assessee to submit information on products except the complained Product.

Write your Comment

Generic

Reportdata/627.pdf

Would you like to edit this news ? Edit

Select Format

You get opportunity to take 30 day Challenge program.

Optional

Advanced

You get opportunity to take 30 day Challenge program.

Optional

Add tags

You get opportunity to take 30 day Challenge program.

Optional

PUBLISH IT

Don't sell
PUBLISH IT
Publish privately
SAVE AS DRAFT

Dont't publish now

Assessee

Anti-profiteering measure — Order of National Anti-Profiteering Authority — Power of DGAP to seek information — Acting on complaint alleging profiteering against one of products of assessee, National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAPA) had ordered an inquiry — However, Director General of Anti Profiteering (DGAP) had by impugned notice sought information on all products of assessee — Assessee challenged said notice on ground that without there being a report of DGAP on complained product followed by an order of NAPA in terms of Rule 133(5)(a) of the CGST Rules, 2017 DGAP could not suo motu issue a notice requiring assessee to submit information on all its products — Held, assessee had made out a prima facie case for grant of limited interim
relief — Till next date, assessee will not be required to furnish information to DGAP pursuant to impugned notice other than information pertaining to complained product — However, NAPA’s inquiry as far as complained Product was concerned will proceed in accordance with law — Interim relief granted.

CM APPL. 32130/2019 (Exemption) 
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

W.P.(C) 7743/2019 and CM APPL. 32129/2019 (Stay) 
2. Notice. Mr. Asheesh Jain, Central Govt. Standing Counsel accepts notice
for Respondent No.1 and Mr. Harpreet Singh, Senior Standing Counsel for
Respondents 2 and 3. 
3. Replies be filed within three weeks. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed by the next date.

4. It is pointed out by Mr. P. Chidambaram, learned Senior Counsel for
Petitioner, that the National Anti Profiteering Authority has ordered an
inquiry as regards one of the products of the Petitioner i.e. Dettol HW Liquid Original 900 ml (‘Complained Product’). The grievance of the Petitioner is that the Director General of Anti Profiteering (DGAP) has by the impugned notice dated 8th/9th April, 2019 sought information on all products of the Petitioner. In this context, he has referred to the recent amendment by which Sub-Rule 5 (a) has been inserted after Sub-Rule 4 in Rule 133 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules 2017 (‘CGST Rules’) which contemplates the NAPA, for reasons to be recorded in writing, and that too after receipt of the report of the DGAP on the Complained Product, to require the DGAP to cause ‘investigation and inquiry with regard to such other goods or services or both’ in accordance with the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act). It is the case of the Petitioner that without there being a report of the DGAP on the complained product followed by an order of NAPA in terms of Rule 133 (5) (a) of the CGST Rules, the DGAP cannot suo motu issue a notice requiring the Petitioner to submit information on all its products which are approximately 3500 in
number.

5. It must be noted here that the Petitioner has also challenged the vires of Section 171 of the CGST Act and various incidental rules including the
newly introduced Rule 133 (5) (a) of the CGST Rules. 
6. The Court is of the view that the Petitioner has made out a prima facie
case for granted of limited interim relief. It is directed that, till the next date,it will not be required to furnish information to the DGAP pursuant to the impugned notice other than information pertaining to the Complained Product. It is, however, clarified that the NAPA’s inquiry as far as the Complained Product is concerned will proceed in accordance with law.

7. List on 22nd August, 2019.

8. Copy of this order be given dasti under the signatures of the Court
Master.

S. MURALIDHAR, J.

TALWANT SINGH, J.

JULY 19, 2019

CM APPL. 32130/2019 (Exemption) 
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

4. It is pointed out by Mr. P. Chidambaram, learned Senior Counsel for
Petitioner, that the National Anti Profiteering Authority has ordered an
inquiry as regards one of the products of the Petitioner i.e. Dettol HW Liquid Original 900 ml (‘Complained Product’). The grievance of the Petitioner is that the Director General of Anti Profiteering (DGAP) has by the impugned notice dated 8th/9th April, 2019 sought information on all products of the Petitioner. In this context, he has referred to the recent amendment by which Sub-Rule 5 (a) has been inserted after Sub-Rule 4 in Rule 133 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules 2017 (‘CGST Rules’) which contemplates the NAPA, for reasons to be recorded in writing, and that too after receipt of the report of the DGAP on the Complained Product, to require the DGAP to cause ‘investigation and inquiry with regard to such other goods or services or both’ in accordance with the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act). It is the case of the Petitioner that without there being a report of the DGAP on the complained product followed by an order of NAPA in terms of Rule 133 (5) (a) of the CGST Rules, the DGAP cannot suo motu issue a notice requiring the Petitioner to submit information on all its products which are approximately 3500 in
number.

7. List on 22nd August, 2019.

8. Copy of this order be given dasti under the signatures of the Court
Master.

S. MURALIDHAR, J.

TALWANT SINGH, J.

JULY 19, 2019

Hi Thakurani,
I want to withdraw in my Thakurani wallet
Thanks,

Select the reason for validity check

I feel great..the news is still good.please give the reason too..thanks..

Why do you think the News as invalid?” Please mention the reason.

I appreciate your effort. May I request you to select one of the reasons from below.
I am marking this post and your reason to Thakurani Moderators. They will take appropriate action.
Thanks,

Write your reason

My Dear ,

Harassing

Spam

Ingenuine

Rotten

Alien

Plagiarism

Unformatted

Rule - 133, Order of the Authority (CGST Rules, 2017)

Prima facie, Director General of Anti Profiteering had no suo motu power to issue a notice requiring an assessee to submit information on products except the complained Product.