9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 842X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gavendhre. ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the writ petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the respondent. 2.The petitioner is a manufacturer of betel nut product and he is dealing with the same in the name and style of "Roja Pakku". The petitioner has been in the business for several years. There are a number of players in the said field. While the other manufacturers took the st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Chapter 8 and not under Chapter 21 was upheld. The petitioner appears to have ignored those developments in his favour probably for the reason that there was not much of financial implication. 3.Post GST, the products classified under Chapter 21 are levied at CGST 9% and SGST 9%. Products classified under Chapter 8 are taxed at a lesser rate. There is still some controversy as to whether they sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pter 21. From this, I am able to understand an element of predetermination on part of the respondent. Of course, as rightly pointed out by the learned standing counsel, the respondent is yet to issue any show cause notice. But from this communication dated 08.07.2020, one can safely conclude that the respondent wants to classify the petitioner's product namely, Roja Pakku under Chapter 21 of C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssified under Chapter 21, the petitioner's past conduct cannot operate as estoppel. In fact, the petitioner's counsel made it clear that he will still clear all controversy and he will respond to the show cause and participate in enquiry, that may be initiated by the respondent. All that he wants is that the respondent should not predetermine the issue based on the petitioner's past co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
