9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 73X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation for advance ruling on 20th March 2019 all the while being aware of the investigation being conducted against them by the DGGI, Bangalore. The respondent KCMPFL chose to keep this fact away from the Authority for Advance Ruling at the time of filing the application. The application for advance ruling could not have been made in this case as it is hit by the provisions of Section 98 (2) of the CGST Act in as much as an investigation was already initiated against them by DGGI on the very same issue that was raised before the Authority for Advance Ruling. The order of the lower Authority is void ab initio as it was vitiated by the provisions of Section 98(2) of the CGST Act - Appeal allowed. - KAR/AAAR/Appeal-13/2019-20 - - - Dated:- 11-2-2020 - SHRI. D.P. NAGENDRA KUMAR, AND SHRI. M.S. SRIKAR, MEMBER Represented By: Shri Jayram N.R. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, LGSTO 40-Authorized representative PROCEEDINGS (Under Section 101 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the KGST Act, 2017) 1. At the outset we would like to make it clear that the provisions of CGST, Act 2017 and SGST, Act 2017 are in pari materia and have the same provisions in like matte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order passed by the Authority and being aggrieved by the said order, communicated with the jurisdictional State GST officer to file an appeal before us. Accordingly, an appeal has been filed by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, LGSTO 40, Bangalore on the following grounds: 6.1. The Appellant submitted that it was brought to their notice by the DGGI, Bangalore Zone Unit, that M/s. KCMPFL (the applicant-respondent) had suppressed vital facts in the application made before the Authority for Advance Ruling about the investigations that had been initiated by the DGGI under the CGST Act, 2017; that investigation was initiated by the Central authority Directorate General of GST Intelligence, Bangalore against the applicant and incident report was issued on 17.01.2019; that this fact of investigations conducted by DGGI against the applicant was not brought to the notice of the Authority; that the Advance Ruling thus obtained by keeping the Authority for Advance Ruling in the dark appears to be not a legal and correct order and therefore it should be appealed against as the subject order of the Authority appears to be invalid ab initio. They referred to the proviso to Sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t has been concluded in para 11 as follows:- Therefore any beverages based on milk and flavoured with cocoa or any other substance will fall for classification under Chapter heading 22 of the CETA and appropriate heading would be 22029030 of CETA. They submitted that the impugned product Flavoured Milk is correctly classifiable under HSN Code 2202 99 30 attracting GST at 12%. PERSONAL HEARING 7. The appellant was called for a personal hearing on 24-12-2019 and was represented by the Sri. Bhanu Prakash, Commercial Tax Officer of Commercial Taxes, LGSTO 40. During the hearing the appellant reiterated the grounds of appeal and pleaded that the ruling given by the Authority for Advance Ruling may be set aside. 8. The respondent was represented by Shri. H.N Srinivas Rao, Advocate who submitted that the investigations by DGGI commenced only in April 2019 whereas the advance ruling was applied for in March 2019. As regards the letter dated 9th Jan 2019 issued by DGGI, the Counsel submitted that the said letter cannot be considered as a summons since it was a routine letter calling for documents and that no investigation had commenced as on the date of filing t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... GST evasion throughout the territory of India under the Central GST Act, 2017, irrespective of the fact that whether the taxpayer is under the control and administration of Centre or State authorities.We find from the records that the DGGI, Bangalore had issued a letter bearing F.No V/I/FLAV MILK/KMF/2018-19 BZU dated 7th January 2019 to KCMPFL calling for certain details in connection with the enquiry undertaken by them on the supply of beverages containing flavoured milk. Thereafter a summons under Section 70 of the CGST Act, 2017 was issued on 9th January 2019 to Shri. Ramesh Konnur, Director (Finance), KCMPFL directing him to appear before the Senior Intelligence Officer on 18th Jan 2019 to tender evidence and to produce certain documents listed therein. This was followed by issue of Incident Report No 133/2018-19 ST on 17th January 2019 wherein it was stated that intelligence was gathered that KCMPFL were mis-classifying flavoured milk under Chapter heading 0402 and discharging GST at 5% instead of classifying the same under Chapter heading 2202 99 30 which attracts 12% GST The incident report states that investigation was initiated by calling for records under summon procedur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
