Translate

25 January 2016

Two eateries in a hypermarket have been slapped with show cause notices for overcharging iced milo and plain water

Eateries slapped with show cause notices for overcharging

 
SHAH ALAM: Two eateries in a hypermarket have been slapped with show cause notices for overcharging iced milo and plain water.  
A kopitiam and a chicken rice shop have a week to justify the reason for charging a glass of iced milo (chocolate malt drink) for RM5.90 and RM6.70 respectively which was inclusive of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) and service charge.  
The latter also have to explain its 80 sen price tag for a glass of warm water.  
The raid was conducted following consumers’ complaints on unreasonable prices charged for the beverages, said Yusof Bakar, who is the senior assistant enforcement director of the Selangor Domestic Trade, Cooperatives and Consumerism Department. 
“The eateries have to furnish justification for the prices with the breakdown of its operation costs and goods sold in the premises.  
“If their explanations are found unsatisfactory, the same notice will be served again. They can be hauled to face legal action if they failed to justify the charges,” he said after a raid at the eateries in section 13 here Monday.  
Yusof said the notices were served under Section 21 of the Price Control and Anti-Profiteering Act 2011. The eateries were also required to furnish information under Section 53A of the same Act on duty to keep records.  
“Many food and beverages business operators have cited the implementation of GST, high rental and utilities fees as reasons when they were flagged for charging high prices,” he said.  
Since January, Yusof said that the department had issued compounds amounting to RM1,700 to nine eateries for profiteering during its Ops Catut in Selangor.  
“Last year, we received a total of 5,987 complaints, where 1,987 of them were GST-related. Others were all related to the food and beverages industry.  
“A total of 207 notices were issued last year, with 28 cases in profiteering.  
“Among them, five were charged in court, five had been referred to the deputy public prosecutor to be charged and 10 more were still under investigations,” he added.

Popular Posts - Last 7 days

Popular Posts - Last 30 days

Blog Archive

LIVE VISITOR TRAFFIC FEED