Timeline
28 November 2017
The GST Council, exercising its powers under Article 279A of the Constitution and the recommendations process, approved the constitution of the Authority, wh…
15 November 2017
The food-service sector drew sustained scrutiny after the GST Council cut the rate on restaurants from 18 per cent to 5 per cent (with withdrawal of input ta…
29 January 2024
In a landmark judgment delivered on , the Delhi High Court in *Reckitt Benckiser India Private Limited v.
1 December 2022
Institutionally, the NAA itself ceased to exist as a separate body: by notification effective , the GST Council transferred the anti-profiteering adjudicator…
1 April 2025
The GST Council subsequently decided to sunset the acceptance of fresh anti-profiteering applications, fixing as the date after which no new complaints woul…
Positions at a glance
Supporters
The National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA) was a statutory enforcement body created under India's Goods and Services Tax regime to prevent businesses from retaining the benefit of tax reductions instead of passing them on to consumers. Its legal foundation is Section 171 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which mandates that any reduction in the rate of tax on a supply, or the benefit of input tax credit, "shall be passed on to the recipient by way of commensurate reduction in prices." The procedural architecture supporting this mandate is set out in Chapter XV (Rules 122 to 137) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017. The GST Council, exercising its powers under Article 279A of the Constitution and the recommendations process, approved the constitution of the Authority, which became operational on 28 November 2017 with B. N. Sharma as its first chairman. The body was conceived as a consumer-protection backstop because the architects of GST feared that the dramatic rate rationalisation accompanying the levy's rollout would be captured as windfall margins rather than reaching households.
Opponents
Among the most consequential orders, the Authority adjudicated against major fast-moving consumer goods, real-estate, and food-service firms. In the Hindustan Unilever Limited matter, the NAA confirmed a profiteering liability running into roughly ₹383 crore arising from the November 2017 reduction of GST rates on a large basket of consumer products. The food-service sector drew sustained scrutiny after the GST Council cut the rate on restaurants from 18 per cent to 5 per cent (with withdrawal of input tax credit) effective 15 November 2017; chains including outlets operating under the McDonald's and Subway franchises faced orders. Real-estate developers were investigated over the additional input tax credit available after the 2019 rate restructuring on under-construction housing. These cases moved into prolonged litigation before the Delhi High Court and other forums, where companies challenged both the constitutionality of Section 171 and the absence of a prescribed computation formula.
Research it like a delegate
Research on modeldiplomat.com
Ask a follow-up about National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA)
Open a cited briefing in Model Diplomat search — timelines, positions, and sources you can use in committee or exam answers.
Start research on National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA)Example
In 2019, India's National Anti-Profiteering Authority ordered Hindustan Unilever Limited to deposit roughly ₹383 crore for failing to pass on the November 2017 GST rate cuts on consumer products to buyers.
Keep learning