---
title: "HUL Found Guilty For Profiteering- Delhi High Court"
date: 2019-05-07
author: "Deiya Goswami"
url: https://ksandk.com/tax/hul-found-guilty-for-profiteering-delhi-high-court/
---

# HUL Found Guilty For Profiteering- Delhi High Court

Posted On - 7 May, 2019 • By - Deiya Goswami

HUL Found Guilty For Profiteering and below is structured analysis of the same –

## 1.1 Meaning

The term ‘profiteering’ means ‘disproportionately large or grossly unfair profit, generated often through manipulation of prices, abuse of dominant position, or by exploiting a bad or unusual situation such as temporary scarcity. There is usually no governmental control over profiteering unless it involves illegal means.’[[1]](#_ftn1) Under the GST regime, it means to make or seek to make an unreasonably large profit by not passing the benefit of price reduction due to implementation of GST to the consumers.[[2]](#_ftn2)

### **1.2****Consequences**

Profiteering leads to increase in  

inflation subsequent to the implementation of GST. Canada, Australia, New  

Zealand, and Malaysia witnessed significant increase in inflation rates upon  

the implementation of GST.

### **2.****Meaning of Anti-Profiteering**

As the name suggests, these rules  

prevent entities from making excessive profits due to implementation of GST as  

it is expected that upon implementation of GST, prices will be reduced. The  

objective is to provide the ultimate consumers the benefit input tax credit.[[3]](#_ftn3) There may be inflationary  

trend in the short and mid-term, but it should not lead to general inflation.  

With regard to foregoing it is to be ensured that the ultimate consumers are  

provided with all the benefits so that the inflation may be contained.

With regard to the foregoing,  

legislature on anti-profiteering measures will contain the inflationary trend  

and also impose a legal obligation on businesses to pass on the benefit to  

ultimate consumers.

### **3.****Introduction and Need of Anti-Profiteering Law**

The Goods and Services (GST) Tax  

Law is one of the biggest indirect tax reform in India. Global trends indicate  

that subsequent to implementation GST Law, There is a short- and medium – term  

inflationary trend in the economy. India as a price – sensitive nation needs to  

understand whether or not the implementation of GST law will lead to  

inflationary trends.

The GST Council has already decided  

on the GST slab rates and the mapping was carried out on the basis of an  

effective industry rate. The government may not have a higher GST revenue, but  

GST implementation will increase the tax base, decrease the grey economy, and  

thus increase the GDP that may increase the government’s revenue.

It may be mentioned here that there  

may be no inflation due to the fact that the effective GST tax rate on most  

products is nearly equal to the existing rates under the different statutes.  

The main reason for inflationary trend is that the operative rate of tax at  

customer level is immediately reformed when any new law is implemented, as the  

commerce takes time to pass on the advantage(s) that has accrued to the level  

of the customer due to many reasons such as lack of awareness of the ‘benefits  

available, lack of clarity on interpretation issues, etc.’[[4]](#_ftn4) ‘Sometimes it may be  

intended on a monopolistic market whereby industry wants to increase its profit  

by sustaining its selling price and thus taking full advantage of it.’[[5]](#_ftn5)’

The situation in India was similar  

when Value Added Tax (VAT) was implemented. Initially, many industries gained  

from implementing the VAT system and maintained prices until the time when the  

final impact of VAT on overall profitability was determined. Following the application  

of VAT, India’s “Comptroller and Auditor General” ‘conducted a national study  

on’ “*Implementation of Value Added Tax in  

India*” and published a study report in June 2010 called “*Lessons for Goods and Services Tax Transition”*.

### **4.****Ramifications of VAT on prices**

The white paper was positive that  

the application of VAT will reduce commodity prices due to the justification of  

tax rates and the abolition of cascading tax effects in the bequest systems.  

But there was no classification for monitoring this impact and making sure the  

benefits were actually passed on to the common man.[[6]](#_ftn6)’

As CAG detected, if there is no  

legal deterrent, history will repeat again. In the case of a Trader who bought  

goods from a manufacturer, let us illustrate this preposition with an  

illustration:  (Figures in Rupees)

It is apparent above table that if  

product prices have not been accustomed for the benefits accrued to the  

supplier, customers pay higher prices for goods and services and this type of condition  

leads to inflationary conditions.[[7]](#_ftn7) In this case, the dealer  

will benefit from the excise duty on goods and the VAT or any type of  service tax on operating expenses that should  

have been passed on to the consumer upon implementation of GST. In the above  

illustration, the dealer did not pass on any benefit to the consumer resulting  

in increased consumer costs, and the dealer’s profits increased to more than  

twice as much.[[8]](#_ftn8)  

This is an instance of dealer profit due to changes in the tax regime and must  

be regulated in the new indirect tax regime.

### **5.****Lew in CGST Act and Anti Profiteering- The Analysis**

**Sec.  

171 of the CGST Act**

“1. 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.”

“2. The Central Government may, on  

recommendations of the Council, by notification, has constituted an Authority  

for examining 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.[[9]](#_ftn9)”

### **5.1 Sec. 171(1) provides for the responsibility to “pass on  

benefit of GST” to recipient for following two aspects:**

**a.  

Any rate reduction in new tax regime:**

“As regards passing of benefit due  

to reduction in rate, in case of supplies exclusive of tax there should not be  

a big challenge, since reduction in tax rate will directly be evidenced by  

invoices and the recipient will get benefit of the rate reduction. However, in  

case where contract of supplies is inclusive of taxes, this provision will cast  

responsibility on the supplier to reduce the price due to reduction in rate of  

taxes. For example, FMCG items which are normally sold on MRP basis or some  

other fixed prices by retailers, if there is any reduction in rate of tax the  

same has to be passed on to the ultimate recipient. Accordingly, there shall be  

need to revise MRP or other prices fixed for such supplies.[[10]](#_ftn10)”

To illustrate if a trader is  

paying, say, ₹ 100 less in  

the new tax rate on a certain item, he has to compulsorily sell that item for ₹ 100 cheaper, so the customer  

benefits proportionally. Failure to do so would mean the trader is indulging in  

‘profiteering’.

**“b.  

For any benefit of Input tax Credit:”**

As regards passing of benefit due  

to better credit chain, it is going to affect almost all industries. In most  

places, be it service sector, manufacturing, trading or any specific industry,  

all are going to get advantage of better flow of Input Tax Credit. Hence there  

should be commensurate reduction in prices of supplies. Application of this  

principal to the Section 171 of the CGST provisions means that any reduction in  

tax rate on any supply of goods or services, or any benefit of ‘input tax  

credit’, must be passed on to the recipient (for example, customer) by the  

registered person (e.g., trader) through a commensurate reduction in prices.[[11]](#_ftn11)

To illustrate the aforesaid  

illustration with the benefit of input tax credit under GST scheme

                                             (Figures in  

Rupees)

### **6.****Comparison of the three scenarios**

(Figures  

in Rupees)

“After going through the comparison  

of three scenarios, it is evident that reduction in prices may be possible  

under the biggest indirect tax reform of the country. Accordingly it is the need  

of the hour that industry suo-moto reduces the prices of goods and services.[[12]](#_ftn12)” However, if it does not  

do so, then legal provisions have been introduced to take care of such  

situations. The necessary provisions have been introduced in the CGST Act for  

curbing the practice of absorbing the tax benefit, rather than passing it on to  

the ultimate consumer by way of real reduction in the price of supplies. That  

is why, despite lot of agitation from industry, the government maintained same  

provision in the CGST Bill[[13]](#_ftn13).

### **7.****Other Provisions**

In the event there has been a  

negative impact on the cost under GST provisions, then prices may be increased.  

For example: If the output supply was zero-rated in previous regime and also  

remains zero-rated under GST regime, the business will not get any input tax  

credit.

If the tax rates have been  

increased and tax under reverse charge imposed etc. then prices will increase.  

For example, domestic LPG was exempt from tax under earlier regime. Now they  

fall under 5% GST. This will result in an increase in the prices of cooking  

gas.[[14]](#_ftn14)

The Central Government has constituted  

National Anti-Profiteering Authority to examine that 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.

### **8.****Anti-Profiteering Authority**

### **8.1 Constitution  

of the Authority**

The  

Central Government constituted the National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA)  

which shall be a five-member committee comprising of a Chairman and four  

technical persons. The Chairman will have a position that is equivalent in rank  

to a Secretary to the Government of India. The Technical Members should’ve been  

Commissioners of State Tax or Central Tax or have held an equivalent post under  

existing laws. The Additional Director of Safeguards under the Central Board of  

Excise and Customs (CBEC) shall be the Secretary to the Authority.

### **8.2 Time  

Period of the Authority**

The  

Authority shall cease to exist after expiry of two years from the date on which  

the Chairman assumes office unless the Council suggests any other  

recommendation.

### **8.3 Duties  

of the Authority**

The Authority shall have the  

following duties:[[15]](#_ftn15)

1. Determining  

whether any reduction in the rate of tax on any supply of goods or services or  

the benefit of input tax credit has been passed on to the recipient by way of  

commensurate reduction in prices;
2. Identifying  

the registered person who has not passed on the benefit of reduction in the  

rate of tax on supply of goods or services or the benefit of input tax credit  

to the recipient by way of commensurate reduction in prices;

- **Ordering:**

1. Reduction  

in Prices;
2. Return to the recipient, an amount equivalent to the amount not passed  

on by way of commensurate reduction in prices along with interest at the rate  

of eighteen percent from the date of collection of the higher amount till the  

date of the return of such amount or recovery of the amount not returned, as  

the case may be, in case the eligible person does not claim return of the  

amount or is not identifiable, the amount should be deposited in the Consumer  

Welfare Fund;
3. Imposition  

of Penalty; and
4. Cancellation  

of Registration

### **9.****International Scenario  

& Indian Context**

“India is not the first country that  

is heading towards the comprehensive GST (VAT) with Anti-profiteering measures[[16]](#_ftn16). Many countries like  

Canada, New Zealand, Australia and Malaysia etc. have witnessed such measures  

while adopting the Goods and Service Tax regime.[[17]](#_ftn17)”

Malaysia adopted Goods and Services  

Tax in 2015, whereby they brought Anti Profiteering provisions for GST through  

their existing legislation called “*Price  

Control and Anti-Profiteering Act 2011”*. [[18]](#_ftn18) Amendment in the existing  

legislation was done through amendment act of 2014 whereby main operating  

provisions read as under:

*“Sec.  

15(1A) The mechanism to determine that profit is unreasonably high referred to  

in sub section (1) includes the Minister determining a certain period during  

which there shall be no increase in the net profit margin of any goods or  

services.”*

Further, Part II and Part III of  

Schedule to “*Price Control and Anti  

Profiteering (Mechanism to Determine Unreasonably High Profit) (Net Profit  

Margin) Regulations 2014*” had prescribed mechanism to calculate net profit  

margin pre-and post-Goods and Service Tax period respectively. Subsequently the  

pre and post net profit margin had to be compared in order to make sure that  

there is no increase in net profit margin post GST implementation.[[19]](#_ftn19)

 In Australia the Anti-Profiteering measures  

were implemented by way of the amendment in existing legislation called “*Australia competition and Consumer Act 2010*”.  

Where in ‘Section 44ZZT’ was added to impose restriction with regard to anti-profiteering  

laws and regulation for class of Goods and services.[[20]](#_ftn20)

Further, In India, The Competition  

Act, 2002 was enacted with following objectives as mentioned in section 18:

1. “Elimination of Practices having  

adverse effect on competition”
2. “Protection  

of interest of consumers”
3. “Promotion  

and sustainability of competition”
4. “Ensuring Freedom of trade among  

participants in the Indian Markets”

The Competition Commission of India  

(CCI) was duly constituted under the Competition Act to take due care of the  

aforesaid objectives of the said enactment.[[21]](#_ftn21) The objectives of the CCI  

are almost similar with objectives of proposed Anti-Profiteering law.

### **10.****Issues & Challenges**

### **10.1 Computational  

Mechanism**

1. It  

is a difficult proposition to identify the relationship between ITC on inward  

supplies and tax payable on outward supplies.[[22]](#_ftn22)  “So ultimately it comes on margins or prices  

of supply. The calculation of margins and prices is a subjective matter. There  

may be various ways like:”

1. “Profit  

on product in absolute terms.”
2. “Profit  

percentage on Cost of Product.”
3. “Profit  

percentage on Sale Price”

- “Besides  

the aids in terms of better credit chain, the business organizations have incurred  

substantial cost for application of GST on account of installation of new  

information and technology systems, restructuring of operations, redesigning of  

standard operating procedures and other compliances costs[[23]](#_ftn23).” The organization may  

pass on the benefits to the consumer only after ascertaining the gains with  

regard to better credit flow vis-a vis increased cost.

### **10.2 Determination  

of Price**

It may be mentioned that the prices  

and margins are not entirely reliant on on taxes and these taxes are one of the  

constituents of price.[[24]](#_ftn24) The fixation of price  

depends on various factors such as:

1. **Internal factors:**

1. “Cost  

of raw material and other components”
2. “Predetermined  

objectives (Higher profit or higher revenue)”
3. “Goodwill  

of the Seller”
4. “Life  

cycle of the product”
5. “Credit  

period offered.”
6. “Promotional  

activities (Heavy advertisement/ promotional exp.)”

- **External factors:**

1. “Competition”
2. “Price  

sensitivity & purchasing power of consumers”
3. “Government  

Control”
4. “Economic  

Condition (Recession)”
5. “Supply  

Chain (Longer the chain, higher would be the price)”

The price fixation of product is not  

just a complicated but also a continuous process and the basic criteria for  

fixation of price completely depends on nature of product.[[25]](#_ftn25) If in view of the  

provisions of Anti Profiteering Measures, prices or margins are being regulated,  

there may be a disastrous situation in many industries. Further, there are  

situations where the corporations would not want to share their strategic of  

pricing certain products even with the tax authorities.

### **10.3 Constitutional  

Challenges**

According  

to the anti-profiteering laws in India, businesses have to pass on the benefit  

of tax cuts as well as tax rebates to consumers. But the businesses often  

increase prices to matching with the reduced taxes due to the unrestricted  

nature of the market[[26]](#_ftn26). Also, there are no  

explicit guidelines for companies which they are required to follow so that the  

benefit of tax rebates and rate reductions on raw materials are passed on to  

consumers at the right measure across all final products. As a result, the  

NAA is witnessing a large number of complaints related to overcharging.[[27]](#_ftn27)

It  

has been almost a year since its inception and NAA is examining 52 cases of  

profiteering. Of these 52 cases, NAA has issued final orders in 14 cases. Of  

the 14 complaint which have been disposed of till date, NAA has fined just five  

companies for not passing on the benefits of GST rate cuts or input tax credit  

to the consumers.[[28]](#_ftn28)

In  

the case of Pyramid Infratech, the company has challenged NAA’s order in Delhi  

High Court and the case was admitted in November 2018 by the court. The  

petition challenges constitutional validity of the anti-profiteering mechanism.  

NAA had found Pyramid Infratech guilty of profiteering and issued the order[[29]](#_ftn29).

1. **“Right to Free Trade:** Article 301 of Indian Constitution  

provides for freedom of trade and commerce throughout India. However, Article 302  

authorizes Parliament to impose reasonable restrictions. Anti-Profiteering  

provisions or restriction on profits on trading of goods or services may be  

treated as violation of fundamental right of freedom of trade and it may be a subject  

matter of judicial review.”

- **“Implication on State Tax/Assesses:** It may be mentioned here that  

power to constitute authority u/s 171 lies with the Central Government only.  

Article 302 authorizes Parliament to impose such restrictions, whereas there  

are stringent conditions for state legislatures to impose such kind of  

restrictions under Article 304. In such a scenario, implementation of  

Anti-Profiteering measures in respect of:”
- “State  

Tax (i.e. SGST) administered by any Government; or”
- “Registered  

Persons, under State Jurisdiction for all taxes may be subjected to judicial  

review.”

### **11.**HUL Found Guilty For Profiteering – Case Study

There was an anonymous complaint  

filed before the National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA) alleging that  

HUL was in violation of Section 171[[30]](#_ftn30) even though the Goods and  

Services Tax have reduced from 28% to 18% on a large number of products, but  

the maximum retail prices of the goods have remained unchanged. Based on the  

investigation by DGAP and the data available, the authority determined HUL  

benefited to the extent of Rs 455.92 crore by not passing on gains from lower  

GST rates. HUL had also claimed Rs 78.97 crore of TRAN-2 credit, the benefit of  

which was also not passed on, taking the total to Rs 534.89 crore, and the  

report said. This latter amount has to be deposited in the central consumer welfare  

fund, as the amount relates to central taxes and duties. After subtracting  

the amounts cited above from Rs 455.92 crore, the amount remaining is Rs 383.35  

crore[[31]](#_ftn31). 

“*The NAA, while passing the order, said that  

₹383.35 crore worth “benefit has been denied” by Hindustan Unilever Ltd (HUL)  

to its customers.*”[[32]](#_ftn32)

The  

HUL was held guilty by NAA for failing to pass the benefit of decreased Goods  

and Services Tax on certain 178 items FMCG products with effect from November  

15, 2017. The product includes detergents, washing and cleaning preparations,  

liquids and creams for washing the skin, shampoos, shaving cream and beauty or  

cosmetics. However, the authority has admitted the company’s claim that its  

customers benefited through higher grammage, which was rejected in some cases  

earlier[[33]](#_ftn33). Accordingly, the 98-page  

order gave HUL credit of `68.77 crore for the move while deciding the quantum  

of supposed profiteering. The company had claimed Rs 119.67 crore of  

grammage benefit to consumers[[34]](#_ftn34). 

The company said in a statement[[35]](#_ftn35), “*In the absence of set rules and guidelines on profiteering, we have  

gone by the spirit of the law, and we passed on the entire benefit received  

under GST to consumers — either through reduction in prices or through increase  

in grammage…*”

Following  

were the orders passed by the NAA[[36]](#_ftn36)

*“Since  

the respondent (HUL) has already deposited an amount of Rs 160.23 crore in the  

Central CWF, he is hereby directed to deposit an amount of Rs 31.45 crore  

in the central CWF and the balance amount of Rs 191.68 crore in CWFs of the  

states…,”*

*“…HUL  

has acted in conscious disregard of the obligation which was cast upon him to  

pass on the benefit of GST rate rate reductions. Instead he had delilberately  

increased the base prices by enhancing them equivalent to the amount of GST  

rate reductions in order to keep the old MRPs in place or not reduced them  

proportionately to the benefit of tax reduction*.”

The High Court (HC), has stayed the  

demand, has directed the NAA that the actions should not be coercive in nature,  

and there should not be any penalty proceedings against the *“fast moving consumer goods”* (FMCG)  

major until the final determination of the matter in the court. Since this  

matter involves issues that require examination of contentions in depth of both  

the parties, the HC has asked HUL to deposit INR 90 crs in two installments by  

May 15, 2019, into the Consumer Welfare Fund (CWF). Accordingly, HUL will have  

to deposit INR 50 crs by March 15, 2019, and INR 40 crs by May 15, 2019, into  

the CWF by the stated deadline.

### **12. Conclusion** HUL Found Guilty For Profiteering

From the consumers’ point of view  

Anti Profiteering Provision is necessary, as the consumers will be entitled to benefits  

of GST implementation.[[37]](#_ftn37) At the same time, with  

respect to the challenges before the industry and the complexities involved in the  

reworking of the cost sheet and re-fixation of prices, the following points  

should be considered:

1. A reasonable margin variation  

should be allowed. If the variation in margin is within such allowable range,  

no registered person should face the penal consequences u/s 171 of the Central Goods  

and Services Act.
2. A minimum limit for turnover of  

taxable supplies may be fixed and below that turnover the provision of Section  

171 shall not be applicable.

Detailed rules  

regarding computation of margins, documentation etc. should be framed so that  

no discretionary power shall be left with any authority.

### Contributed By- Deiya Goswami

---

[[1]](#_ftnref1) *Profiteering*, Web Finance  

(Apr. 15, 2019, 06:06 P.M.), businessdictionary.com/definition/profiteering.html.

[[2]](#_ftnref2) Mukund Abhyankar, *Anti-profiteering clause in GST India*, Avalara (Apr. 15, 2019, 06:18 P.M.), https://www.avalara.com/in/en/blog/2017/04/anti-profiteering-clause-gst-india.html.

[[3]](#_ftnref3) *Anti-Profiteering*, Merriam-Webster  

(Apr. 15, 2019, 06:45 P.M.), https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anti-profiteering.

[[4]](#_ftnref4) *Anti-Profiteering*, Merriam-Webster  

(Apr. 15, 2019, 06:45 P.M.), https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anti-profiteering.

[[5]](#_ftnref5) Mukund Abhyankar, *Anti-profiteering clause in GST India*, Avalara (Apr. 15, 2019, 06:18 P.M.), https://www.avalara.com/in/en/blog/2017/04/anti-profiteering-clause-gst-india.html.

[[6]](#_ftnref6) *Anti-Profiteering Under GST: Meaning, Authority and Issues*, Masters India (Apr. 15, 2019, 06:35  

P.M.), https://www.mastersindia.co/gst/anti-profiteering-gst-meaning-authority-issues/.

[[7]](#_ftnref7) Sachin Dave, *Patanjali distributors come under anti-profiteering lens*, Economic Times (Apr. 15, 2019, 07:19  

P.M.), https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/cons-products/fmcg/patanjali-distributors-come-under-anti-profiteering-lens/articleshow/68177016.cms.

[[8]](#_ftnref8) *Anti profiteering in GST– Is litigation an option?*,  Economic  

Times (Apr. 15, 2019, 07:39 P.M.), https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/small-biz/policy-trends/anti-profiteering-in-gst-is-litigation-an-option/articleshow/68043409.cms.

[[9]](#_ftnref9) *What does Anti-Profiteering mean in relation to GST?*, Transamerica Direct Marketing Consultants (Apr.  

15, 2019, 08:20 P.M.), https://www.tomorrowmakers.com/tax-planning/what-does-anti-profiteering-mean-relation-gst-article.

[[10]](#_ftnref10) *Anti-Profiteering Under GST: Meaning, Authority and Issues*, Masters India (Apr. 15, 2019, 06:35  

P.M.), https://www.mastersindia.co/gst/anti-profiteering-gst-meaning-authority-issues/.

[[11]](#_ftnref11)  *Anti-Profiteering*,  

National Anti-profiteering Authority  

(Apr. 15, 2019, 08:52 P.M.), http://www.naa.gov.in/page.php?id=anti-profiteering.

[[12]](#_ftnref12) *Anti-Profiteering*, National  

Anti-profiteering Authority (Apr. 15, 2019, 08:52 P.M.), http://www.naa.gov.in/page.php?id=anti-profiteering.

[[13]](#_ftnref13) Deepak Patel, *Meaning: Anti-profiteering*, Indian  

Express (Apr. 15, 2019, 09:12 P.M.), https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/tax-meaning-anti-profiteering-gst-rollout-indian-econony-rates-slab-4717643/.

[[14]](#_ftnref14) *Anti-Profiteering Rules*, Defmacro  

Software (Apr. 15, 2019, 09:27 P.M.), https://cleartax.in/s/anti-profiteering-gst-law.

[[15]](#_ftnref15) *Anti-Profiteering Rules*, Defmacro  

Software (Apr. 15, 2019, 09:27 P.M.), https://cleartax.in/s/anti-profiteering-gst-law.

[[16]](#_ftnref16) *Anti-Profiteering Rules*, Defmacro  

Software (Apr. 15, 2019, 09:27 P.M.), https://cleartax.in/s/anti-profiteering-gst-law.

[[17]](#_ftnref17) Deepak Patel, *Meaning: Anti-profiteering*, Indian  

Express (Apr. 15, 2019, 09:12 P.M.), https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/tax-meaning-anti-profiteering-gst-rollout-indian-econony-rates-slab-4717643/.

[[18]](#_ftnref18) *Anti-Profiteering*, National  

Anti-profiteering Authority (Apr. 15, 2019, 08:52 P.M.), http://www.naa.gov.in/page.php?id=anti-profiteering.

[[19]](#_ftnref19) *What is the anti-profiteering clause in the GST law?*, Quora (Apr. 15, 2019, 09:57 P.M.), https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-anti-profiteering-clause-in-the-GST-law.

[[20]](#_ftnref20) *A look back on anti-profiteering, its relevance and the need for well defined  

norms*, Economic Times (Apr.  

15, 2019, 10:22 P.M.), https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/small-biz/policy-trends/a-look-back-on-anti-profiteering-its-relevance-and-the-need-for-well-defined-norms/articleshow/64743244.cms.

[[21]](#_ftnref21) *What is the anti-profiteering clause in the GST law?*, Quora (Apr. 15, 2019, 09:57 P.M.), https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-anti-profiteering-clause-in-the-GST-law.

[[22]](#_ftnref22) *A look back on anti-profiteering, its relevance and the need for well  

defined norms*, Economic Times (Apr.  

15, 2019, 10:22 P.M.), https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/small-biz/policy-trends/a-look-back-on-anti-profiteering-its-relevance-and-the-need-for-well-defined-norms/articleshow/64743244.cms.

[[23]](#_ftnref23) *HUL found guilty of profiteering ₹383 crore*, Indian Awaaz (Apr. 15, 2019, 10:27  

P.M.), https://theindianawaaz.com/hul-found-guilty-of-profiteering-%E2%82%B9383-crore/.

[[24]](#_ftnref24) Mukund Abhyankar, *Anti-profiteering clause in GST India*, Avalara (Apr. 15, 2019, 06:18 P.M.), https://www.avalara.com/in/en/blog/2017/04/anti-profiteering-clause-gst-india.html.

[[25]](#_ftnref25)*A look back on anti-profiteering, its relevance and the need for well defined  

norms*, Economic Times (Apr. 15, 2019, 10:22  

P.M.), https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/small-biz/policy-trends/a-look-back-on-anti-profiteering-its-relevance-and-the-need-for-well-defined-norms/articleshow/64743244.cms.

[[26]](#_ftnref26) *HUL found guilty of profiteering ₹383 crore*, (Apr. 15, 2019, 10:27  

P.M.), http://www.newsonair.nic.in/Main-News-Details.aspx?id=357109.

[[27]](#_ftnref27) *HUL found guilty of Profiteering Rs. 383 crore*, GKToday (Apr. 15, 2019, 10:41 P.M.), https://currentaffairs.gktoday.in/hul-guilty-profiteering-rs-383-crore-12201863793.html.

[[28]](#_ftnref28) Mukund Abhyankar, *Anti-profiteering clause in GST India*, Avalara (Apr. 15, 2019, 06:18 P.M.), https://www.avalara.com/in/en/blog/2017/04/anti-profiteering-clause-gst-india.html.

[[29]](#_ftnref29) Timsy Jaipuria, *Anti-profiteering body may pass final order  

on profiteering complaint against HUL*, TV18  

Broadcast (Apr. 15, 2019, 11:11 P.M.), https://www.cnbctv18.com/business/anti-profiteering-body-may-pass-final-order-on-profiteering-complaint-against-hul-1513261.htm.

[[30]](#_ftnref30) *Lessons from anti-profiteering order against HUL*, Rediff (Apr. 15, 2019, 06:18 P.M.), https://www.rediff.com/business/special/lessons-from-anti-profiteering-order-against-hul/20190121.htm.

[[31]](#_ftnref31) *GST authority finds HUL guilty of profiteering Rs 383 crore*, Economic Times (Apr. 15, 2019, 11:19  

P.M.), https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/gst-authority-finds-hul-guilty-of-profiteering-rs-383-crore/articleshow/67234533.cms.

[[32]](#_ftnref32) *HUL Found Guilty of Profiteering ₹383 Crore*, The Hindu (Apr. 15, 2019, 11:32 P.M.), https://www.thehindu.com/business/Industry/hul-found-guilty-of-profiteering-383-crore/article25821689.ece.

[[33]](#_ftnref33) *HUL found guilty of not passing ₹383-crore GST rate-cuts*, The Hindu (Apr. 15, 2019, 11:42 P.M.), https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/companies/hul-found-guilty-of-not-passing-383-crore-gst-rate-cuts/article25821961.ece.

[[34]](#_ftnref34) *GST authority finds HUL guilty of profiteering Rs 383 crore*, Economic Times (Apr. 15, 2019, 11:19  

P.M.), https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/gst-authority-finds-hul-guilty-of-profiteering-rs-383-crore/articleshow/67234533.cms.

*HUL found guilty of  

not passing ₹383-crore GST rate-cuts*,  

The Hindu (Apr. 15, 2019, 11:42  

P.M.), https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/companies/hul-found-guilty-of-not-passing-383-crore-gst-rate-cuts/article25821961.ece.

[[36]](#_ftnref36)  *GST  

authority finds HUL guilty of profiteering Rs 383 cr*, Bennett, Coleman & Co. (Apr. 15, 2019, 11:49 P.M.), https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/gst-authority-finds-hul-guilty-of-profiteering-rs-383-cr/articleshow/67234252.cms.

[[37]](#_ftnref37) *A look back on anti-profiteering, its relevance and the need for well defined norms*, Economic Times (Apr. 15, 2019, 10:22 P.M.), [https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/small-biz/policy-trends/a-look-back-on-anti-profiteering-its-relevance-and-the-need-for-well-defined-norms/articleshow/64743244.cms](https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/small-biz/policy-trends/a-look-back-on-anti-profiteering-its-relevance-and-the-need-for-well-defined-norms/articleshow/64743244.cms).

#### [King Stubb & Kasiva](https://ksandk.com/),  
Advocates & Attorneys

[Click Here to Get in Touch](https://ksandk.com/ksk/contact-us/)

[New Delhi](https://g.page/king-stubb-and-kasiva) | [Mumbai](https://g.page/king-stubb-kasiva-mumbai) | [Bangalore](https://g.page/king-stubb-kasiva-bangalore) | [Chennai](https://g.page/king-stubb-kasiva-chennai) | [Hyderabad](https://g.page/king-stubb-kasiva-hyderabad) | Kochi  
Tel: [+91 11 41032969](tel:+911141032969) | Email: [info@ksandk.com](mailto:info@ksandk.com)

*Last Updated on 12 May, 2024*

---

## Office Locations                                                                                                                                                     
                                               
  - [New Delhi](https://ksandk.com/locations/top-corporate-law-firm-in-delhi/) (HQ): +91-11-41318190 | info@ksandk.com                                                    
  - [Mumbai](https://ksandk.com/locations/top-corporate-law-firm-in-mumbai/): 3 offices (Nariman Point, Lower Parel, Andheri) | mumbai@ksandk.com
  - [Bangalore](https://ksandk.com/locations/top-corporate-law-firm-in-bangalore/): bangalore@ksandk.com                                                                  
  - [Chennai](https://ksandk.com/locations/chennai/): chennai@ksandk.com                                                                                                  
  - [Hyderabad](https://ksandk.com/locations/hyderabad/): hyderabad@ksandk.com                                                                                            
  - [Pune](https://ksandk.com/locations/pune/): pune@ksandk.com                                                                                                           
  - [Kochi](https://ksandk.com/locations/kochi/): kochi@ksandk.com
                                                                                                                                                                          
  ## Contact                                   
                                                                                                                                                                          
  - [Contact Page](https://ksandk.com/contact-us/)
  - General: info@ksandk.com | +91-11-41318190
  - WhatsApp: +91-7428567444
  - [Privacy Statement](https://ksandk.com/privacy-statement/)                                                                                                            
  - [Terms of Use](https://ksandk.com/terms-of-use/)