DEHRADUN/HARIDWAR: In a double blow to Patanjali, the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) in Chandigarh has imposed a hefty penalty of Rs 27.5 crore on Patanjali Foods for an irregularity in Input Tax Credit (ITC). The notice comes a day after the Uttarakhand govt suspended the licences for 14 products sold by Patanjali Ayurved and Divya Pharmacy, including popular offerings Swasari Gold, Mukta Vati Extra Power, and BP Grit.
The penalty by DGGI Chandigarh stems from the detection of a Rs 20-crore irregularity in ITC, as GST officials revealed. According to GST officials, in case of a fake ITC claim, a penalty can be imposed up to the amount of the ITC claim along with interest. They said that in this case, the wrong ITC claim was Rs 20 crore, and the penalty amount is Rs 27.5 crore – inclusive of interest — hence, the total amount stands at Rs 47.5 crore. Despite attempts by TOI, Patanjali officials remained unresponsive for comment.
Meanwhile, legal tussle escalated as Uttarakhand suspended licences for 14 Patanjali products, including those mentioned above. The state government also demanded the formula for these drugs from Patanjali. Speaking to TOI, Patanjali Ayurved media in-charge S K Tijarawala stated, “We will reply to the notice served by state govt and take legal recourse regarding the action taken against us.”
This action follows a case filed by the Indian Medical Association (IMA) in the Supreme Court after Patanjali published an advertisement claiming to cure various diseases, which the IMA deemed misleading. The apex court scrutinised govt’s response to Patanjali Ayurved’s activities, criticising their passivity. Responding to the court’s queries, the state Ayurvedic and Unani Services department suspended the licences of the mentioned drugs under provisions of the Drug and Cosmetic Act 1945. Dr Mithlesh Kumar, the drug controller, stated, “Manufacturing permission for the mentioned drugs is suspended with immediate effect.”
The legal confrontation deepened as the Ayurvedic and Unani services department of the Ayush ministry filed affidavits regarding the action taken against Patanjali. The department sought the apex court’s permission to file revised affidavits, and the case is scheduled for a hearing on May 14.
The penalty by DGGI Chandigarh stems from the detection of a Rs 20-crore irregularity in ITC, as GST officials revealed. According to GST officials, in case of a fake ITC claim, a penalty can be imposed up to the amount of the ITC claim along with interest. They said that in this case, the wrong ITC claim was Rs 20 crore, and the penalty amount is Rs 27.5 crore – inclusive of interest — hence, the total amount stands at Rs 47.5 crore. Despite attempts by TOI, Patanjali officials remained unresponsive for comment.
Meanwhile, legal tussle escalated as Uttarakhand suspended licences for 14 Patanjali products, including those mentioned above. The state government also demanded the formula for these drugs from Patanjali. Speaking to TOI, Patanjali Ayurved media in-charge S K Tijarawala stated, “We will reply to the notice served by state govt and take legal recourse regarding the action taken against us.”
This action follows a case filed by the Indian Medical Association (IMA) in the Supreme Court after Patanjali published an advertisement claiming to cure various diseases, which the IMA deemed misleading. The apex court scrutinised govt’s response to Patanjali Ayurved’s activities, criticising their passivity. Responding to the court’s queries, the state Ayurvedic and Unani Services department suspended the licences of the mentioned drugs under provisions of the Drug and Cosmetic Act 1945. Dr Mithlesh Kumar, the drug controller, stated, “Manufacturing permission for the mentioned drugs is suspended with immediate effect.”
The legal confrontation deepened as the Ayurvedic and Unani services department of the Ayush ministry filed affidavits regarding the action taken against Patanjali. The department sought the apex court’s permission to file revised affidavits, and the case is scheduled for a hearing on May 14.