APPELLATE AUTHORITY DECISION ON CGST CLASSIFICATION APPEAL: GYANKEER TOBACCO PRODUCTS PVT LTD VS ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, UDAIPUR
RAJASTHAN APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING
GOODS AND SERVICES TAX
Before the Bench of
1.Sh. Mahendra Ranga, Member (Central Tax)
2.Dr. Ravi Kumar Surpur, Member (State Tax)
Case Title: Additional Commissioner, CGST & CE/ST. Commissionerate, Udaipur
(GST AAAR RAJASTHAN)
Order No. RAJ/AAAR/02/2023-24
Appeal No. RAJ/AAAR/APP/03/2023-24 against Letter No. 0 I /Letter/ AAR/State/2023-24 dated 11.07.2023
Date of Judgment/Order- 22nd November 2023
BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE
Para No. 3.6 The quality control manager and the directors of M/s GTPPL. in their statement recorded before the Anti Evasion Branch, reportedly admitted that: they were using machines instead or manpower in manufacturing their tobacco product “Keer Kokil” subject matter or the AAR Ruling; that they were using additional raw ingredients “Nut Meg Aroma” and “Mentha Oil” in their product “Keer Kokil”. which were not pronounced in the AAR Ruling; that they also reportedly admitted that initially they manufactured their product as per the process allowed by the AAR Ruling and after their product didn’t garner much success, they adopted a new process involving use of machines and mixing of ingredients which was not covered by the Ruling and is different from the one approved in the Ruling.
IMPORTANT PARAGRAPHS
Para No. 4.2 That the act of the taxpayer regarding misuse of Advance Ruling before the AAR is in violation of Section 104 of the CGST Act, 2017. The provisions of Section 104 of the CGST Act, 201 7 is reproduced below for ready reference please –
*Section 104. Advance ruling to be void in certain circumstances.
(1) Where the Authority or the Appellate Authority 1 [or the National Appellate Authority] finds that advance ruling pronounced by it under sub-section (4) of section 98 or under sub-section (1) of section 101 2 [or under section 101C] has been obtained by the applicant or the appellant by fraud or suppression of material facts or misrepresentation of facts, it may, by order, declare such ruling to be void ab-initio and thereupon all the provisions of this Act or the rules made there under shall apply to the applicant or the appellant as if such advance ruling had never been made:
Provided that no order shall be passed under this sub-section unless an opportunity of being heard has been given to the applicant or the appellant.
Explanation-The period beginning with the date of such advance ruling and ending with the date of order under this sub-section shall be excluded while computing the period specified in sub-sections (2) and (10) of section 73 or sub-sections (2) and (10) of section 74.
(2) A copy of the order made under sub-section (1) shall be sent to the applicant. the concerned officer and the Jurisdictional officer.
Para No. 6.6.3 Gyan Singh Jhala admitted that the product manufactured at Village Thamlu. Tehsil Mawli, Distt Udaipur was different from the product manufactured at their plant at Jhar Saadri. The former did not involve use or machines and Nutmeg Aroma and Mentha Oil ond the process involved in its production was submitted before AAR in respect of “which Ruling was pronounced. The latter. however, involved use of machines and additional substances, which was not approved by the AAR Ruling in question.
Para No. 14. In the instant case, this Authority finds that this appeal has been filed against the decision of the AAR, Rajasthan under Section 104 of the CGST Act, 2017. We note that no remedy lies before this authority against this decision. The revenue have also raised contentions against AAR, Rajasthan Ruling dated 01.06.2022. We note that no appeal was filed against the AAR Order dated 01.06.2022. The instant petition cannot be treated as an appeal by default; that will be time-barred too. We note that the instant appeal is not an appeal under Section 100 against the order passed under Section 98(4) or 98(5) of the CGST Act, 2017. Thus, it is outside the purview of the domain of this Authority. As a statutory authority with a specified statutory role, this authority cannot venture into any other area beyond what is prescribed in law.
ORDER
The instant appeal filed by CGST. Udaipur before AAAR against the letter dared 11.07.2023 issued by AAR, Rajasthan is not maintainable. It is disposed of accordingly.
