Selling a Rs 20 water bottle for Rs 55 proved costly for the restaurant. symbolic photo
Jagran correspondent, Chandigarh. The State Consumer Commission has given a big decision and has held Ghazal Restaurant located in Sector-17 guilty of negligence in service. The restaurant had charged Rs 55 from the customer for a Rs 20 mineral water bottle. The Consumer Commission clarified that restaurants cannot charge customers more than the MRP on mineral water or other packaged items.
The restaurant not only gave the customer a water bottle which was more expensive than the MRP, but also collected Central and State GST on it. The Commission said that tax is already included in MRP. Therefore it is unfair to pay more tax on this. The Commission has directed the restaurant to return the excess amount collected on water bottles and pay a compensation of Rs 3,000.
The Commission has given this decision on the complaint of Ishita Khanna, resident of New Chandigarh. The state consumer commission in its decision has said that restaurants and hotels cannot sell pre-packed products - such as mineral water and packaged drinking water - at a price higher than the maximum retail price (MRP). The Commission said that all types of taxes, packaging expenses and seller's profit are already included in MRP.
On December 12, 2023, at around 8:30 pm, Ishita had gone for dinner at a restaurant in Chandigarh. There his bill became Rs 1922, which also included GST. The bill charged Rs 55 for a bottle of packaged drinking water, while the MRP on the bottle was only Rs 20.
He talked to the restaurant staff, but no one there listened to him. In such a situation, he filed a case in the Consumer Commission. Ishita had initially filed a petition in the District Consumer Commission which was rejected. He then challenged this decision in the State Consumer Commission.
The restaurant gave this argument
It was argued on behalf of the restaurant that here customers are given the facility to sit in a good environment. For his better service, he charged more than the MRP on the water bottle, however, the Commission did not accept these arguments and ruled in favor of the customer.