2024 Supreme(Del) 164
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Manmohan, Dinesh Kumar Sharma, JJ.
Reckitt Benckiser India Private Limited - Appellant
Versus
Union of India Through: Its Secretary & Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) 7743 of 2019 and W.P.(C) 10999 of 2018 etc.
Decided On : 29-01-2024
Mr. P. Chidambaram, Senior Advocate with Mr. R. Jawahar Lal, Mr. Siddharth Bawa Mr. Anuj Garg, Mr. Mohit Sharma and Ms. Harshita Advocates. Mr.Amar Dave, Amicus Curiae with Mr. Vikramaditya Bhaskar, Advocate, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sanjeev Menon, Mr.Vivek Gurnani, Mr. Kavish Garach, Ms. Abhipriya, Mr.Vivek Gaurav, Ms.Sejal Aneja and Ms.Manisha, Advocates for NAA and DGAP.
Mr.Asheesh Jain, CGSC with Mr. Gaurav Kumar Advocate for R-1.
Mr.Farman Ali, Advocate with Ms.Usha and Mr.Krishan Kumar, Advocates for R-2 & 3.
Section 171 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 mandates suppliers to pass on tax benefits to consumers through price reductions, ensuring consumer welfare and preventing unjust enrichment.
Headnote:(A) Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Section 171 - Constitutional validity challenged - Anti-profiteering provisions require suppliers to pass on tax benefits to consumers through price reductions - The court upheld the provisions, stating they do not violate Articles 19(1)(g) or 300A of the Constitution - The Act aims to ensure consumer welfare by mandating that tax reductions are reflected in prices, preventing unjust enrichment by suppliers - The court emphasized that the legislature has the prerogative to determine how benefits are passed on to consumers and that the provisions are not a price-fixing mechanism. (Paras 86-164)
(B) Legislative Competence - The court found that Section 171 falls within the law-making power of Parliament under Article 246A, addressing ancillary matters related to Goods and Services Tax.
(C) Delegation of Powers - The court ruled that the provisions do not delegate essential legislative functions and provide sufficient guidelines for implementation.
(D) Judicial Oversight - The absence of a right to appeal does not render the provisions unconstitutional, as judicial review is available under Article 226. (E) Methodology for Determining Profiteering - The court acknowledged that no fixed method can be prescribed for determining profiteering, as it varies by case and industry. (F) Conclusion - The constitutional validity of Section 171 and related rules is upheld, with the court emphasizing the importance of consumer welfare and the need for suppliers to pass on benefits. (Paras 86-164)
JUDGMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Manmohan, A.C.J.
THE CHALLENGE
1. Present writ petitions have been filed challenging the constitutional validity of Section 171 of the Central Good and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short `Act, 2017') and Rules 122, 124, 126, 127, 129, 133 and 134 of the Central Good and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (for short `Rules, 2017') as well as legality of the notices proposing imposition or orders imposing penalty issued by the National Anti-Profiteering Authority (`NAA') under Section 122 of the Act, 2017 read with Rule 133(3)(d) of the Rules, 2017 and the final orders passed by NAA, whereby the petitioners, who are companies running diverse businesses ranging from hospitality, Fast-Moving Consumer Goods (`FMCG') to real estate, have been directed in accordance with Section 171 of Act, 2017, to pass on the commensurate benefit of reduction in the rate of tax or the Input Tax Credit to its consumers/recipients along with interest.
2. Learned counsel for the parties prayed that this Court may first decide the plea of constitutional validity of Section 171 of Act, 2017 as well as Rules 122, 124, 126, 127, 129, 133 and 134 of the Rules, 2017. They stated that only in the event this Court were to uphold the constitutional validity of the aforesaid Section and Rules, would the need to examine the matters on merits arise.
3. Accepting the suggestion of the learned counsel for the parties, this Court proceeded to hear the issue of constitutional validity of Section 171 of Act, 2017 as well as Rules 122, 124, 126, 127, 129, 133 and 134 of the Rules, 2017. The said provisions are reproduced hereinbelow:
Section 171
"17