Haryana

Ambala

CC/427/2017

Jatwinder Grewal - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Arvind Lifestyle - Opp.Party(s)

19 Mar 2018

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AMBALA

 

                                                          Complaint case no.        :  427 of 2017

                                                          Date of Institution         :  01.12.2017                                                               

                                                          Date of decision   :  19.03.2018

 

Jatwinder Grewal S/o Sh. Balwinder Singh, r/o 105 Ranjeet Nagar, Bhadson Road, Patiala (Punjab)

……. Complainant.

Vs.

 

1.       M/s  Arvind Lifestyle Brands Ltd, through its Manager/Managing Director, DU Parc Trinty, 8^th Floor, 17, M.G.Road, Bangalore-560001.

2.       M/s AR-Chawala Fashions 18, NH-1 Factory Stores G.T.  Road, Ambala Cantt-133004.

 ….….Opposite Parties.

 

Before:        Sh. D.N. Arora, President.

                   Sh. Pushpender Kumar, Member.

Ms. Anamika Gupta, Member.                           

 

 

Present:       Sh. Harpreet Singh, counsel for the complainant.

                   Ops proceeded against ex parte v.o.d 19.01.2018.

.

 

ORDER:

                   In nutshell, brief facts of the present complaint is that the complainant have purchased two shirts in brand name of Arrow vide Bill No.B141N1701455 dated 19.11.2017 from OP No.2 manufactured by OP No.1. At the time of sale of the shirts, the OP No.2 assured to the complainant that the shirts are on 50% discount and he would have to pay the 50% amount of both the shirts. Taking into consideration of the assurance given by the OP No.2 the complainant has spent and amount of Rs. 3134/- on the above said shirts. After the purchase of the shirts, the complainant calculated the total amount of bill and he found that the OP No. have charged him excess amount in the bill because the total MRP of two shirts are Rs. 5598/- & after 50% had charge him Rs. 3,134/-, the complainant immediately asked about the reason of extra charge and the salasman told him that they have charged the GST @ 12% after discount and i.e. Rs. 335/- The complainant has requested them to rectify the fault and return the extra amount of Rs. 335/- charged by them because the MRP of product is inclusive of all taxes but the same was not rectified by the Ops. Thus in this manner the Ops are indulged in practicing unfair means of business and be cheated the complainant. Hence, the present complaint.

2.                Registered notice issued to Op Nos. 1 & 2 but none have turned up on their behalf and they have proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 19.01.2018.

3.                To prove his version complainant tendered his affidavit as Annexure C-A with documents as annexure C-1 to C-3 and close his evidence.

4.                We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and carefully gone through the case file.   

5.                 Under the Consumer Goods (Mandatory Printing of Cost of Production and Maximum Retail Price) Act, 2006, certain guidelines have been provided so that the consumer cannot be charged over to the maximum price printed on the goods by the manufacturer. These guidelines are as follows:

1.     Consumer goods mean all goods and items brought in the market for sale and are meant for the use and consumption of the consumers;

2.     Cost of production means cost incurred directly or indirectly by the manufacturer in the production of goods;

3.     Printing means printing of the cost of production and retail price at a visible place on the product in Hindi and English and the local language of the place it is sold; and

4.     Maximum retail price means such price at which the product shall be sold in retail and such price shall include all taxes levied on the product.

In the present case MRP of the both products to the tune of Rs.2,999 & Rs. 2,599 /- is mentioned on the price tag  as per Annexure C-1 but on Annexure C-2 i.e. Bill it is mentioned that an amount of  Rs.335/- including GST @ 12% after giving discount @ 50 %  as is evident through documents as mentioned above. Under the consumer Laws the MRP is inclusive of all taxes, so whenever a discount is offered, it is on MRP, hence it is illegal to charge the GST, on the discounted price. The consumer forum and national commission has passed many orders terming the practice as unfair and imposed penalties but is it still continuing. The reason is that if 1% customer goes to court, they won’t mind paying penalty. By putting such boards they are virtually misleading the public concerning the price at which a product or product are, ordinarily sold. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi, in number of has observed that no tax can be charged in the name of  discount on MRP. Hon’ble State Commission in case titled as M/s Adi Sports Vs. Shyam Sunder Sharma and Anr. decided on 23.05.2016 in Appeal No.101 of 2016 has held that We are satisfied that once it is mentioned in a label put on T-shirts that MRP includes the taxes imposed, then after giving discount, it was not open to the appellant to tax the goods again. For adopting the said procedure, nothing has been brought on record by the appellant, to say that levy was justified. Probably double taxation is not permissible. The appellant, thus, adopted unfair trade practice, on that count.  Moreover the Ops are exparte in this case, therefore, the version of the complainant also remained unrebutted.

5.                From the above it is clear that the OPs are deficient in providing service besides indulging in unfair trade practice as per Section 2 (1) (r) of Consumer Protection Act which is as under: 

(r) “unfair trade practice” means a trade practice which, for the purpose of promoting the sale, use or supply of any goods or for the provision of any service, adopts any unfair method or unfair or deceptive practice.

 

6.                Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case this Forum has in a firm view that the present complaint deserves acceptance because the Ops are indulged in the unfair trade practice as discussed above. Accordingly, we allow the present complaint with costs and OPs are directed to comply with the following directions within thirty days from receipt of copy of the order:             

1. To refund Rs.335/-(charged on account of GST).
2. To pay Rs.5,000/- on account of mental agony, harassment and unfair trade practice.
3. To pay Rs.3,000/- on account of litigation charges.

 

Copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules. File after due compliance be consigned to record room.

Announced on :19.03.2018                                 

 

 

 

(PUSHPENDER KUMAR)    (ANAMIKA GUPTA)     (D.N. ARORA)    Member                           Member                           President