Is this profiteering

Himalaya anti wrinkle cream earlier had price of 250 MRP and i thought gst rate on cosmetics was changed by finance ministry to 18%

Should the mrp have reduced from 250.

The first product is 2016 make (pre gst) and the online listing is may 2019. On flipkart the price is 350 for same product.

Please advise more  

View all 10 comments Below 10 comments
Thanks all. Sharing more examples more  
Friends, please do not beat about the bush. Let us understand the inquisition. I try to explain what questioner, Niharika Jain wants to understand:
1) Product produced was of 2016, and the MRP was Rs.250.
2) The MRP of the same product in 2019 is quoted as Rs.350, as per the list price.
3) The consumer says that the gst rate was changed (the date of which is not mentioned) to 18%, say, the gst rate was reduced in the year 2018.
4) The answer of the manufacturer is that between the year 2016 (the date of manufacture) and 2019 (the current rate of production) with a time gap of three years, the production and marketing costs have since increased.
5) The consumer argues that the manufacturer has since increased the MRP absorbing rising cost in the three years and government giving the benefit (additional) of reduced gst. Therefore, the benefit of reduced gst should have been passed on to the consumer, which has not been done.
(Here, I would like the questioner, Niharika Jain, to produce copies of the two Tax Invoice - of 2016 and 2019. It will also be appropriate for the Tax Authorities of the State/Centre to obtain copies of the Input Costs of the years 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019 to determine the actual value of the MRP - for academic purposes)
6) So, on the one hand through the proportionate add up of the rising Input Cost the manufacturer has made up the production and marketing costs in the MRP, but has not given the benefit of reduced gst to the consumer. Therefore, it is a clear case of unfair business practice and should be refunded the overcharged gst to the consumer. It is a case of Unfair BUsiness Practice, not of Anti-profiteering. National Anti-profiteering Authority has no claim on the overcharged gst.
7) This confusion is also because the Government of India in the Department of Revenue/Taxation has never laid down the format of a Tax Invoice meant to be given to the buyer. more  
Let this fraud be exposed in Twitter, Facebook, WhatsApp etc to go viral so that public start questioning and demanding fair and legally valid price. more  
Matter should be referred to National anti profiteering agency more  
yes, it is profiteering and should be reported. more  
Post a Comment

Related Posts

    • Nivea’s potential profiteering

      MRP of nivea shower gel stays at 349 whether gst rate was 28% or as now is 18% Need for enquiry please

      By Anil Mehta
    • Anti Profiteering term extension

      Super delighted to read that term of anti profiteering body has been extended by 2 years. I really hope now all the complaints filed by me and many other members of circle will be taken on priority...

      By Garima Sharma
    • Profteering off the farmers

      Had one of my uncles who is a farmer in andhra visit me yesterday. The price at which he sells mango is 10 rupees a kg. Big basket sells same mango for 110 rupees a kg. So much so for being fair...

      By Anshu Saxena
    • Great news - Term of anti-profiteering extended by 2 years

      'Thumbs up to the consumer, thumbs down news for profiteering companies esp builders. Also good news that if the profiteering companies dont pay the amount 20% penalty will be enforced. \ud83d\ud...

      By Venkata Lukka
    • Is ITC profiteering

      Fiama di willis brand of ITC cool burst men shower gel. MRP before rate reduction 199. Same after rate reduction. Yesterdays screenshot. The MRP should have been reduced to 185 or so. If ITC type...

      By Garima Sharma
    • Adidas profiteering more example

      Something is definitely wrong. 2 screenshots of nov 2017 and one recent of 2019. 190 MRP should have been 175 after rate reduction but instead 200.

      By Garima Sharma
    • Unilever clearly profiteering

      Here see how unilever has been profiteering. The product in 11/17 pre gst rate reduction on cosmetics was having MRP 199. Even now the same product (ydays screenshot) has MRP 199 while gst rate has...

      By Garima Sharma
    • GST by OYO

      I had booked a room through OYO ROOMS. while checking in I had asked hotel that I need a Tax Invoice with our company's GST number. They had confirmed it to be Fine. While checking out I had been t...

      By Desh Malhotra
    • Biotique company may also be profiteering

      See screenshot of product made in 09/17 had MRP 180. Despite gst rate dropping from 28% to 18% on cosmetics the mrp in 2019, this morning - big basket is 180. The mrp should have been around 165....

      By Niharika Jain
    • HUL short film on water scarecity

      HUL is now airing a rather derogatory short film about their concerns for the rural poor. Water scarcity is severe across the country including urban centres and remote rural areas. But this film...

      By Ramesh Muthya
Share To
Enter your email & mobile number and we will send you the instructions

Note - The email can sometime gets delivered to the spam folder, so the instruction will be send to your mobile as well

Please select a Circle that you want people to invite to.
Invite to
(Maximum 500 email ids allowed.)