9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 1427X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... all not be admitted in terms of the provisions of Section 98(2) of CGST Act, 2017, as the question raised in the application has already been decided by the SGST authorities, Sikandrabad. - Order No. 48 - - - Dated:- 6-1-2020 - AJAY KUMAR MISRA AND DINESH KUMAR VERMA PROCEEDING OF THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING U/S. 98 OF THE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 Sub:- GST ACT, 2017 - Advance Ruling U/ s 98 - liability to tax under GST Act in respect to application dated 13.09.2019 of M/s. Laxmi Traders (Pramod Kumar), C-9, Industrial Area, Sikandrabad, Bulandshahar, Uttar Pradesh - Order- Reg. 1) M/s. Laxmi Traders (Pramod Kumar), C-9, Industrial Area, Sikandrabad, Bulandshahar, Uttar Pradesh (here in after called the applic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 23.11.2019, wherein it has been reported that: i. Applicant is engaged in dyeing and printing service on job work basis wherein he is using colour, chemical and tinplate of his own, thus making a composite supply. ii. Presently applicant owes liability on service part only and not on the material transfer of his own, while he is claiming the refund of ITC on material transfer of his own. iii. Applicant is doing the job work of dyeing and printing of textile cloth which does not fall under the category of manufacturing services as there is no new thing or textile product comes into emergence. iv. GST Council has notified the dyeing and colouring services under the HSN heading 9997 chargeable @9%. 6). The applica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ade by the applicant and have examined the explanation submitted by them. We also observe that the Deputy Commissioner Commercial Tax, Sikandrabad, vide letter 70/D. Commr./CT/Sikandrabad dated 03.01.2020 has informed that with reference to the refund claim filed by the applicant, a Show Cause Notice was issued to the applicant vide RFD-08 and the refund application of the applicant was rejected by the jurisdictional authority vide RFD-06 dated 20.07.2019. Further, on perusal of the said Refund Rejection Order dated 20.07.2019, we observe that the jurisdictional authority, before rejecting the said refund claim, has discussed, in lengths, about the classification and rate of duty of the activity performed by the applicant. 9). We further ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
