9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 153X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) are in pari materia and have the same provisions in like matter and differ from each other only on a few specific provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is particularly made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the CGST Act, 2017 would also mean reference to the corresponding similar provisions in the GGST Act, 2017. 2. The present appeal has been filed under Section 100 of the CGST Act, 2017 and GGST Act, 2017 by M/s. J. K. Snacks Industries (hereinafter referred to as the Appellant ) against the Advance Ruling No. GUJ/GAAR/R/78/2020 dated 17.09.2020. 3. The appellant has raised the following questions for advance ruling in the application for Advance Ruling filed by it before the Gujarat Authority for Advance Ruling (herein after referred to as the GAAR ). 1. Under which tariff Heading the product dealt in by the applicant i.e. PAPAD of different shapes and sizes are eligible to be classified? 2. What is the applicable rate of SGST and CGST on supply of such Papad of different shapes and sizes. 4. The appellant has submitted that they are engaged in the business of manufacturing and trading of Papad of different shapes and sizes. Papad is c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bility of the product is equally a deciding factor. It is also observed that in common parlance or in market, Fryums are not sold as PAPAD , instead PAPAD are sold as papad and Fryums are sold as Fryums . Both the products are different and have their individual identity. Accordingly, in common parlance test, the appellant s product i.e. different shapes and sizes of Papad is not Papad but is Un-fried Fryums . Thus, Heading 2106 is an omnibus heading covering all kind of edible preparations, not elsewhere specified or included. Chapter Note 5 provides an inclusive definition of this heading and covers preparations for use either directly or after processing, for human consumption. Chapter Note 6 pertaining to Tariff Item 2106 90 99 also provides inclusive definition and products mentioned therein are illustrative only. In view of the foregoing, the GAAR ruled as follows :- 1. Under which tariff Heading the product dealt in by the applicant i.e. PAPAD of different shapes and sizes are eligible to be classified? Ans . The product of different shape and sizes manufactured and supplied by applicant in un-fried Fryums and not Papad and is classifiable under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... representative, by order, either admit or reject the application: Provided that 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: 10. The appellant has submitted that legality and propriety of the impugned order in terms of Section 98(2) of CGST Act, 2017 is required to be examined and a decision to be taken whether the said order is correct in law or void ab initio and hence deserves to be set aside. 11. The appellant has inter-alia mentioned in e-mail dated 01.04.2021 that they have extensively made the submissions with respect to classification of commodity, with all necessary citations of relevant cases, in memo of appeal; that they had nothing to state besides what has been stated as no new argument remained to be canvassed. It has been submitted that due to Covid 19 situation, it may not be possible to attend personal hearing by their advocate, therefore, it has been requested to pass just and fair order. FINDINGS :- 12. We have carefully gone through and considered the appeal and written submissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the record of personal hearing has been perused and it is observed that the virtual Personal hearing (through video conferencing) was conducted and recorded as During the personal hearing conducted through video conferencing, the representative of the applicant reiterated the submission given by the applicant. This shows that during the personal hearing, representative of appellant have not informed anything about the proceedings of DGGI, Surat. 16. It appears that had the fact of pending proceedings before the DGGI Surat in applicant s own case relating to questions raised in the application filed before the GAAR been brought to the notice of the GAAR, the application for advance ruling would not have been admitted in view of the proviso to sub-section (2) of section 98 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the question of issuing advance ruling would not have arisen. 17. However, the appellant have not informed the aforesaid material facts to the GAAR at any given point of time thereby willfully suppressing the fact from the Authority and obtaining the Ruling by suppressing the facts. Section 104 of the CGST Act, 2017 stipulates that any Ruling obtained by the applicant under Sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
