Latest news with #UrbanEssence
Economic Times
4 days ago
- Business
- Economic Times
GST court passes order against Subway franchisee for not passing rate cut benefit to customer
In its first order in profiteering case, the newly constituted GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) has held Urban Essence, a franchisee of Subway Ltd, guilty of not passing GST rate cut benefit of Rs 5.47 lakh. The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Authority (GSTAT) order dated August 5 upheld the Directorate General of Anti-profiteering (DGAP) report that Urban Essence has profiteered to the extent of Rs 5.47 lakh by not passing on a commensurate reduction of the prices of food products to customers. The order in this regard was passed by GSTAT President Justice (Retd) Sanjaya Kumar Mishra. The appellate tribunal directed the Pune-based entity to deposit a sum of Rs 5,45,005 along with an 18 per cent interest from November 15, 2017 and deposit tha same in the consumer welfare fund in Maharashtra within 3 months. The case pertained to a customer complaint against Urban Essence for not passing the benefit of reduction of GST rate, on restaurant services, from 18 per cent to 5 per cent with effect from November 15, 2017. The GSTAT also looked into the issue of whether the entity was eligible to claim input tax credit (ITC) on some invoices. The DGAP, which investigated the case, had covered the period from November 15, 2017 to October 31, 2019, to check whether the GST rate cut benefits were passed to consumers. On December 1, 2022, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) was given the responsibility to decide on anti-profiteering cases under GST. Such cases were earlier decided by the National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA). From October 1, 2024, the Principal Bench of GSTAT has been empowered to examine anti-profiteering cases. AMRG & Associates Senior Partner Rajat Mohan said the DGAP vs Urban Essence decision marks the first final order from the GSTAT's anti-profiteering division, signalling that the division is now fully operational, with the President himself conducting hearings and delivering orders. "This sets the tone for a more structured and authoritative approach to anti-profiteering enforcement under Section 171. The Tribunal's stance-upholding DGAP's findings across all products and rejecting cost-based justifications-reinforces that GST rate cut benefits must be directly passed on to consumers, backed by strong documentation, or face decisive action," Mohan added
Mint
4 days ago
- Business
- Mint
GSTAT passes order against Subway franchisee for not passing rate cut benefit to customer
New Delhi, Aug 13 (PTI) In its first order in profiteering case, the newly constituted GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) has held Urban Essence, a franchisee of Subway Ltd, guilty of not passing GST rate cut benefit of ₹ 5.47 lakh. The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Authority (GSTAT) order dated August 5 upheld the Directorate General of Anti-profiteering (DGAP) report that Urban Essence has profiteered to the extent of ₹ 5.47 lakh by not passing on a commensurate reduction of the prices of food products to customers. The order in this regard was passed by GSTAT President Justice (Retd) Sanjaya Kumar Mishra. The appellate tribunal directed the Pune-based entity to deposit a sum of ₹ 5,45,005 along with an 18 per cent interest from November 15, 2017 and deposit tha same in the consumer welfare fund in Maharashtra within 3 months. The case pertained to a customer complaint against Urban Essence for not passing the benefit of reduction of GST rate, on restaurant services, from 18 per cent to 5 per cent with effect from November 15, 2017. The GSTAT also looked into the issue of whether the entity was eligible to claim input tax credit (ITC) on some invoices. The DGAP, which investigated the case, had covered the period from November 15, 2017 to October 31, 2019, to check whether the GST rate cut benefits were passed to consumers. On December 1, 2022, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) was given the responsibility to decide on anti-profiteering cases under GST. Such cases were earlier decided by the National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA). From October 1, 2024, the Principal Bench of GSTAT has been empowered to examine anti-profiteering cases. AMRG & Associates Senior Partner Rajat Mohan said the DGAP vs Urban Essence decision marks the first final order from the GSTAT's anti-profiteering division, signalling that the division is now fully operational, with the President himself conducting hearings and delivering orders. "This sets the tone for a more structured and authoritative approach to anti-profiteering enforcement under Section 171. The Tribunal's stance—upholding DGAP's findings across all products and rejecting cost-based justifications—reinforces that GST rate cut benefits must be directly passed on to consumers, backed by strong documentation, or face decisive action," Mohan added.
Time of India
4 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
GST court passes order against Subway franchisee for not passing rate cut benefit to customer
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel In its first order in profiteering case, the newly constituted GST Appellate Tribunal GSTAT ) has held Urban Essence , a franchisee of Subway Ltd , guilty of not passing GST rate cut benefit of Rs 5.47 Goods and Services Tax Appellate Authority (GSTAT) order dated August 5 upheld the Directorate General of Anti-profiteering (DGAP) report that Urban Essence has profiteered to the extent of Rs 5.47 lakh by not passing on a commensurate reduction of the prices of food products to order in this regard was passed by GSTAT President Justice (Retd) Sanjaya Kumar appellate tribunal directed the Pune-based entity to deposit a sum of Rs 5,45,005 along with an 18 per cent interest from November 15, 2017 and deposit tha same in the consumer welfare fund in Maharashtra within 3 case pertained to a customer complaint against Urban Essence for not passing the benefit of reduction of GST rate, on restaurant services, from 18 per cent to 5 per cent with effect from November 15, GSTAT also looked into the issue of whether the entity was eligible to claim input tax credit (ITC) on some DGAP, which investigated the case, had covered the period from November 15, 2017 to October 31, 2019, to check whether the GST rate cut benefits were passed to December 1, 2022, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) was given the responsibility to decide on anti-profiteering cases under GST. Such cases were earlier decided by the National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA).From October 1, 2024, the Principal Bench of GSTAT has been empowered to examine anti-profiteering & Associates Senior Partner Rajat Mohan said the DGAP vs Urban Essence decision marks the first final order from the GSTAT's anti-profiteering division, signalling that the division is now fully operational, with the President himself conducting hearings and delivering orders."This sets the tone for a more structured and authoritative approach to anti-profiteering enforcement under Section 171. The Tribunal's stance-upholding DGAP's findings across all products and rejecting cost-based justifications-reinforces that GST rate cut benefits must be directly passed on to consumers, backed by strong documentation, or face decisive action," Mohan added
New Indian Express
4 days ago
- Business
- New Indian Express
GSTAT penalises Subway franchisee Rs 5.45 lakh for profiteering
Urban Essence, a franchisee of Subway, has been ordered to deposit Rs 5,45,005 plus 18% interest into the Consumer Welfare Funds (CWF) of the Central and Maharashtra governments within three months. This directive came after the GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) confirmed an anti-profiteering order against the company. The case involved allegations that Urban Essence failed to pass on the benefit of a GST rate reduction on restaurant services. The GST rate for restaurant services was reduced from 18% to 5% effective from November 15, 2017. However, an investigation by the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) found that Urban Essence had increased the base prices of its menu items, resulting in the cum-tax price paid by consumers not being reduced commensurately with the GST rate cut. The investigation period was from November 15, 2017, to October 31, 2019. The GSTAT's final order, issued on August 5, 2025, determined that Urban Essence had profiteered by not reducing its selling prices. As a result, the company was directed to return the amount of Rs 5,45,005 along with 18% interest from the date of collection (November 15, 2017). The final order was issued in Delhi, where the GSTAT's Principal Bench is located, and was signed by Manmohan Sharma, a Stenographer/Law researcher for the Delhi (PB) jurisdiction.
