9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 842X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tention of the petitioner's counsel that the petitioner also deserves to be given a treatment of parity and not taxed at a higher rate, if the petitioner's product is comparable to Nizam Pakku and Crane Pakku. More than anything else, as per Article 141 of the Constitution of the India, the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is law of the land. Merely because the petitioner h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g 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 stand that the product in question will come under Chapter 8 of the Central Excise Tariff ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ored 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 should be taxed at the rate of 2.5% + 2.5% or at the rate of 6% + 6%. 4.The pet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 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 Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and levy tax at CGST 9% and SGST 9%. 6 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 conduct. I have already held that the petitioner's past conduct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
