2019 (10) TMI 273 - AAR - GST

Maintainability of application - matter already pending before other authority - Classification of goods - Chewing Tobacco - applicability of N/N. 01 / 2017 -Compensation Cess-(Rate) - HELD THAT - From the comments furnished by the Commissioner GST Central Excise, Trichy, it is seen that the proceedings in respect of the applicant on the very issue raised by him before this authority has been initiated and an offence case booked vide O.R. No. 17/2018-19(DPU-GST) dated 09.01.2019. We find that the application is filed on 06.02.2019 i.e after the proceedings initiated under the provisions of the GST Act. As per the first proviso to Section 98(2) of CGST/TNGST Act 2017 the authority shall not admit the application where the question raised in the application is already pending or decided in any proceedings in the case of an applicant under any of the provisions of this Act. In the case at hand, it is established that the issue raised by the applicant is pending before the Jurisdictional authority at the time of filing of this application - Therefore, the same cannot be admitted and is to be rejected without going into the merits of the issue.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Classification of chewing tobacco product and applicability of Notification No.01/2017 - Compensation Cess - (Rate)

Analysis:
The applicant, a manufacturer of chewing tobacco, sought an advance ruling on the classification of their product and the applicability of a specific notification. They detailed their manufacturing process, emphasizing the absence of chemically flavored substances in their handmade product. They highlighted the historical imposition of central excise duty based on packaging methods and the lack of specific GST compensation cess for manual pack tobacco products in the current regime. The GST authorities attempted to classify their product under chemically flavored tobacco categories, leading to disputes over classification and cess levy.

In response to the applicant's submission, the jurisdictional authority provided comments indicating ongoing proceedings against the applicant for short payment of Compensation Cess and reclassification demands. The authority noted that the applicant's issue was already under consideration by the jurisdictional authority before the application for advance ruling was filed. Citing the relevant legal provisions, the authority rejected the application, stating that issues already pending before appropriate authorities cannot be admitted for advance ruling.

The ruling emphasized the legal provision prohibiting the admission of applications where the issue is already pending before the jurisdictional authority. Consequently, the application seeking an advance ruling on the classification of the chewing tobacco product and the applicability of a specific notification was rejected due to the pre-existence of proceedings on the same matter.