IndiaAudit Lens

Rule 129 of the CGST Rules, 2017

From the IndiaAuditLens Law Library

GST›CGST Rules, 2017›Chapter XV, Anti-Profiteering

At a glance

Bars, duties and time limits

129(3)–(4)Before investigation, interested parties receive notice identifying the goods or services, the factual basis of the allegations and the reply time. The Director General may notify other persons for a fair enquiry.
129(5)Evidence supplied by an interested party must be made available to the other participating interested parties.
129(6)Investigation must finish within six months of the Standing Committee’s reference. The Authority may allow up to three further months for written reasons. On completion, the Director General sends findings and relevant documents to the Authority.

Procedure, powers and definitions

129(1)–(2)The Standing Committee refers a matter for detailed investigation when satisfied that prima-facie evidence shows the supplier did not pass on a tax-rate or input tax credit benefit. The Director General investigates and collects necessary evidence.
129(2)The law does not settle what evidence is necessary to establish whether the benefit was passed on; it gives no exhaustive evidence list.

Rule 129 sets out referral, notice, evidence-sharing and completion requirements for an anti-profiteering investigation. The Standing Committee refers a supported matter to the Director General of Anti-profiteering, who investigates whether the benefit reached recipients through commensurate price reductions. The procedure operates within the applicable jurisdiction, including the separate bar on acceptance of new examination requests from 1 April 2025.^[1]

Quick facts

Rule 129, CGST Rules, 2017

Initiation and conduct of proceedings

Provision
Act	Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017
Chapter	XV, Anti-Profiteering
Rule title	Initiation and conduct of proceedings
Amendments
Amendments	3 footnotes in the CBIC text (table)
Related provisions
Other rules	Rule 128, Rule 130, Rule 133
Structure 129(1)Standing Committee referral 129(2)Investigation and collection of necessary evidence 129(3)Notice before investigation 129(4)Discretionary notices to other persons 129(5)Participating-party evidence availability 129(6)Investigation completion time 129(6)Report following investigation completion
Source
Law text	CBIC tax information portal, served on 17 September 2026^[1]

Text

The text below is the rule as served by the CBIC tax information portal on 17 September 2026, with the portal's own amendment footnote markers (shown as small numerals before a bracket) and its footnotes.^[1] The Rules as published in the Gazette of India is the legal source.

Rule 129, verbatim (show)

Rule 129. Initiation and conduct of proceedings. -

(1) Where the Standing Committee is satisfied that there is a prima-facie evidence to show that the supplier has Not passed on the benefit of reduction in the rate of tax on the supply of goods or services or the benefit of input tax credit to the recipient by way of commensurate reduction in prices, it shall refer the matter to the ¹[Director General of Anti-profiteering] for a detailed investigation.

(2) The ¹[Director General of Anti-profiteering] shall conduct investigation and collect evidence necessary to determine whether the benefit of 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.

(3) The ¹[Director General of Anti-profiteering] shall, before initiation of the investigation, issue a Notice to the interested parties containing, inter alia, information on the following, namely:-

(a) the description of the goods or services in respect of which the proceeding shave been initiated;

(b) summary of the statement of facts on which the allegations are based; and (c)the time limit allowed to the interested parties and other persons who may have information related to the proceedings for furnishing their reply.

(4) The ¹[Director General of Anti-profiteering] may also issue Notices to such other persons as deemed fit for a fair enquiry into the matter.

(5) The ¹[Director General of Anti-profiteering] shall make available the evidence presented to it by one interested party to the other interested parties, participating in the proceedings.

(6) The ¹[Director General of Anti-profiteering] shall complete the investigation within a period of ²[six]months of the receipt of the reference from the Standing Committee or within such extended period Not exceeding a further period of three months for reasons to be recorded in writing ³[as may be allowed by the Authority] and, upon completion of the investigation, furnish to the Authority, a report of its findings along with the relevant records.

1. Substituted for the word "Safeguards" vide Notification No. 29/2018-CT dated 06.07.2018 [w.e.f. 12.06.2018]

2. Substituted vide Notification No. 31/2019- CT dated 28.06.2019 for "three"

3. Substituted vide Notification No. 14/2018-CT dated23.03.2018 for "as allowed by the Standing Committee".

Questions to answer on the file

Questions a reviewer answers from the engagement file, grouped by the part of the rule they come from. They describe what the rule asks; they do not decide it.

Standing Committee referral 129(1)

Questions to answer on the file3 questions

Was the Standing Committee satisfied of prima-facie evidence of non-passing of the benefit?
Was the matter referred to the Director General of Anti-profiteering?
Was the reference for a detailed investigation?

Ticks stay in this browser only.

Investigation and collection of necessary evidence 129(2)

Questions to answer on the file3 questions

Did the Director General of Anti-profiteering conduct the investigation?
Did the Director General collect evidence on benefit passing through commensurate recipient prices?
Was the collected evidence necessary to determine that benefit-passing issue?

Ticks stay in this browser only.

Notice before investigation 129(3)

Questions to answer on the file10 questions

Did DGAP issue the notice to the interested parties?
On what date was that notice issued?
On what date did investigation begin?
Does reliable chronology establish notice issue strictly before investigation began?
Does the notice describe the goods or services concerned?
Does the notice contain the summary of the allegation facts?
Does the notice state the reply time limit for interested parties?
Does the notice state the reply time limit for other persons who may have information related to the proceedings?
Was the information at issue in this notice supplied on a confidential basis?
Does the proposed confidential notice treatment comply with Rule 130 while preserving every unaffected Rule 129(3) content requirement?

Ticks stay in this browser only.

Discretionary notices to other persons 129(4)

Questions to answer on the file2 questions

Did DGAP deem issuing this other-person notice fit for a fair enquiry?
Was the notice issued to that other person?

Ticks stay in this browser only.

Participating-party evidence availability 129(5)

Questions to answer on the file6 questions

Was the evidence presented by an interested party?
Is the recipient another interested party?
Is that recipient participating in the proceedings?
Was that same evidence made available to that recipient?
Was that information provided on a confidential basis?
Have the applicable Rule 130 safeguards been established for the proposed treatment of this information?

Ticks stay in this browser only.

Investigation completion time 129(6)

Questions to answer on the file7 questions

On what date did the Director General of Anti-profiteering receive this Standing Committee reference?
What is the exact 6-calendar-month endpoint from that receipt?
On what date did the Director General of Anti-profiteering complete the investigation?
Did the Authority allow the extension for this matter?
Were the extension reasons recorded in writing?
What endpoint did that actual extension authorize?
What is the endpoint of a further 3 calendar months after the ordinary period?

Ticks stay in this browser only.

Report following investigation completion 129(6)

Questions to answer on the file5 questions

Was this investigation completed?
Was the report furnished to the Authority?
Does that report contain DGAP findings?
Were the relevant records furnished with it?
Was the report furnished upon completion of that investigation?

Ticks stay in this browser only.

Amendment history

The CBIC text carries 3 footnotes. The table gives each in the source's own terms. Effective dates are as the footnotes state them.^[1]

Amendments to Rule 129 as footnoted in the CBIC text
Note	Change
1	Substituted for the word "Safeguards" vide Notification No. 29/2018-CT dated 06.07.2018 [w.e.f. 12.06.2018]^[2]
2	Substituted vide Notification No. 31/2019- CT dated 28.06.2019 for "three"^[3]
3	Substituted vide Notification No. 14/2018-CT dated23.03.2018 for "as allowed by the Standing Committee".^[4]

Provisions connected to Rule 129
Provision	Connection	Words that tie them
Rule 128	this provision requires Rule 128	129(1) "Standing Committee is satisfied"
Rule 130	this provision requires Rule 130	129(5) "make available the evidence"
Rule 133	this provision requires Rule 133	129(6) "furnish to the Authority, a report"

Circulars and notifications

Circulars and notifications in the CBIC repository that cite this rule, newest first, by number, date and subject. A listing here does not say what an instrument decides; read the instrument.

Notifications (4)

Number	Date	Subject
Notification No. 31/2019-Central Tax	28 June 2019	Seeks to carry out changes in the CGST Rules, 2017. amended by a later instrument
Notification No. 29/2018-Central Tax	6 July 2018	Seek to make amendments (Seventh Amendment, 2018) to the CGST Rules, 2017
Notification No. 14/2018-Central Tax	23 March 2018	Amending the CGST Rules, 2017(Third Amendment Rules, 2018).
Notification No. 10/2017-Central Tax	28 June 2017	Seeks to amend CGST Rules notification no 3/2017-Central Tax dt 19.06.2017 amended by a later instrument

Unsettled questions

The words of Rule 129 do not answer this question. Where one decides a matter on the file, the answer depends on the position taken on it.

What establishes necessary evidence for determining benefit passing under Rule 129(2), where the text supplies no exhaustive evidence list?

See also

Rule 128 of the CGST Rules, 2017: examination of application by the Standing Committee and Screening Committee
Rule 130 of the CGST Rules, 2017: confidentiality of information
Rule 133 of the CGST Rules, 2017: order of the Authority

References

Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs. "Rule 129. Initiation and conduct of proceedings". Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, CBIC tax information portal, with amendment footnotes 1 to 3. Retrieved 17 September 2026.
Notification No. 29/2018-Central Tax, dated 6 July 2018: Seek to make amendments (Seventh Amendment, 2018) to the CGST Rules, 2017. Cited in CBIC footnote 1.
Notification No. 31/2019-Central Tax, dated 28 June 2019: Seeks to carry out changes in the CGST Rules, 2017. Cited in CBIC footnote 2.
Notification No. 14/2018-Central Tax, dated 23 March 2018: Amending the CGST Rules, 2017(Third Amendment Rules, 2018). Cited in CBIC footnote 3.

External links

CGST Rules, 2017, Rule 129 on the CBIC tax information portal