TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 1357X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct. 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 . The instant appeal filed by CGST, Udaipur before AAAR against the letter dated 11.07.2023 issued by AAR - Rajasthan is not maintainable. - SH. MAHENDRA RANGA AND DR. RAVI KUMAR SURPUR, MEMBER Present for the Appellant : Sh. Jasveer Khichar, Joint Commissioner, CGST Udaipur Present for the Respondent : Sh. Sanjay Jhanwar, Senior Advocate Sh. Keshav Maloo, CA Sh. Rahul Lakhwani, Advocate (Proceedings under Section 101 of the Central GST Act, 2017 read with Section 101 of the Rajasthan GST Act, 2017) At the outset, we note that the provisions of both the Central Goods and Servies Tax Act, 2017 and the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 are same barring a few exceptions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made of such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the Central GST Act, 2017 should be treated as a reference to the corresponding provisions under the Rajasthan GST Act. 2017. 2. The present appeal has been filed under Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... #2306; डाला जाएगा | 2. फिर उसमे लाइम पेस्ट डाला जाएगा | 3. दोनों हाथो से अच्छी तरह मिलाया जाएगा | 4. फिर इस को सुखाया जाएगा | 5. तदुपरांत नमी व ताज़गी बनी रहे इसके लिए इसे मॉइस् चराइज किया जाएगा | 6. फिर पाउच पैकिंग मशीन द्व&# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... heir tobacco product but apparently, they were using machines. Additional ingredient such as Nut Meg Aroma and Mentha Oil , which were not disclosed/mentioned in their submission made before AAR Rajasthan on 16.05.2022. The actual production process and the ingredients used for manufacturing the tobacco product Keer Kokil were found by them in variance with those mentioned in the ruling pronounced by the AAR. Rajasthan vide their ruling No. Raj/AAR/2022-23/07 dated 01.06.2022. 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 of manpower in manufacturing their tobacco product Keer Kokil subject matter of 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 n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ell as the ingredients used in manufacturer of product as declared before the AAR Rajasthan for obtaining the said advance ruling dated 01.06.2022; that there is no change in their product tobacco premixed with lime: a How chart of the production process which is reproduced in the ruling and it was also submitted that a little aroma and menthol will also be used in the product, which appeared in third para of point 1 on page 3 of the Advance Ruling. 3.11 Considering the submissions made from both sides, AAR vide letter dated 11.07.2023 held as under: that on the basis of documents submitted before AAR, it revealed that applicant has submitted that Lime paste is mixed with Raw cut Tobacco and dried in Auto Plant where water gets evaporated during drying process; after drying in auto plant, the lime mixed tobacco is processed through vibrators to segregate uneven leaves and dust; the resulting semi-finished product is then stored in Jute fabric covered steel Silos; such semi-finished product is then processed in coating plant to add aroma, menthol and moisturizing which becomes final product i.e. Tobacco pre-mixed with lime for packing in pouches and dispatch. The applican ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r, declare such ruling to be void ab-initio and thereupon all the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder 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. 4.3 That during the search conducted at premises of M/s GTPPL, it was observed that the taxpayer is following a process to manufacture their tobacco product Keer Kokil which differs from the manufacturing process declared by them to AAR. Rajasthan on 16.05.2022. based on which the ruling was pronounced by the AAR. Rajasthan vide their ruling no Raj/AAR/2022-23/07 dated 01.06.2022 . 4.4 That the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he aggrieved Jurisdictional Officer can file an Appeal only against an Advance Ruling pronounced u/s 98(4) of the CGST/RGST Act. As per the facts of the present case, the impugned letter/communication is not a ruling pronounced u/s 98(4) of the CGST Act. hence the present appeal is not maintainable. Further, it is a settled principle of law that a right of appeal is not natural or inherent right but a statutory right remedy which must be governed by the statute that grants it. In the present case, the provision to appeal granted under Section 100 only covers appeal against ruling pronounced u/s 98(4) of CGST/RGST Act. The Letter/Communication dated 10.07.2023 is not appealable u/s 100 as it does not fall under the ambit of an Advance Ruling pronounced u/s 98 of the CGST/RGST Act. therefore, the appeal is not maintainable u/s 100 of the Act section 100 has been reproduced here under for your ready reference- (1) The concerned officer, the jurisdictional officer or an applicant aggrieved by any advance ruling pronounced under sub-section (4) of section 98, may appeal to the Appellate Authority. (2) Every appeal under this section shall be filed within a period of thirty d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appeal within the time limit. However, in the present case the said period for filing an appeal had lapsed way before the present appeal has been preferred by the Appellant Department. Therefore, the present appeal filed by the Appellant Department is barred by limitation. 6. The Anti Evasion Branch. CGST Udaipur vide their letter dated 08.) 1.2023 have furnished following additional grounds in continuation of their appeal dated 11.08.2023: 6.1 M/s Gyankeer Tobacco Products Pvt Ltd (M/s GTPPL. earlier known as Ms Gyankeer Products Pvt Ltd) (hereinafter referred to as the taxpayer or as the respondent ). 00. Factory premises. NH 08. Miraj Campus. Nathdwara, Rajsamand, Rajasthan-313301. holder of GST Registration No. 08AAHCG3822A1ZI. are a Manufacturer of tobacco products. 6.2 That the taxpayer filed an application before AAR, Rajasthan to pronounce advance ruling as it falls under the ambit of Section 97(2)(a) for classification of any goods or services or both and for seeking clarification on their product Keer Kokil tobacco premised with lime to be classified as unmanufactured tobacco without lime tube falling under Chapter 2401. That the Taxpayer at the lime of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aste is made out of it using a machine. The lime paste is transported to the first floor where it is mixed with raw tobacco in a mixing machine. The mixture is then transported on conveyor belts to tractors which transport it to an open area and lay it on the ground for drying. The dried mixture is then sieved, stored and sent to coaling plant. The process at the coating plant is supervised by Arjun Singh Kitawat. Quality Manager. 6.6 Gyan Singh Jhala. Director. M/s GTPPL also corroborated that facts admitted by Ashok Kumar Saini and Arjun Singh Kitawat and narrated the whole process used in the manufacturing of their product Keer Kokil in his statement dated 26.04.2023. He admittedly used the word Manufactured Tobacco Product for their product. He also admitted that when they initially submitted their manufacturing process before AAR in which Mentha Oil and Nutmeg aroma was proposed be added, he came to realize during the hearings that this process will lead to classification of their product as manufactured tobacco. They then re-submitted on 16.05.2023, a process which did not mention the use of machines or addition of Nutmeg Aroma and Mentha Oil. The same has been mentione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with and is satisfied with the videography of the manufacturing process done by the Anti Evasion Branch. CGST Udaipur during the search conducted at the premises of M/s GTPPL on 25.04.2023. 6.8 Furthermore. Suresh Kumar Keer. the fourth director of M/s GTPPL in his statement dated 26.04.2023 corroborated the process undertaken by them for manufacture of their product Keer Kokil . It was same as narrated by the other director. He also corroborated the facts about the process used in their previously manufactured product: how it is different from their current product and how they came to adopt this process. This was also admitted by Gyan Singh Jhala. one of the Directors in M/s GTPPL in his statement summarized above. 6.9 Subsequently, on perusal of the pouches of their product Keer Kokil previously manufactured at their village Thamla, Mawli premises and of the one manufactured at their present, rented premise at Jhar, Saadri, it is observed that in the latter there is a clear and imposing mention of mktd by Mirage Sales and Marketing LLP above the brand name Keer Kokil which was not present in the former pouch. Corroboratory Evidence during Investigation against M/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d lime. In case of M/s SPPL. the CRCL vide their report dated 27.09.2023 declared that the sample contained same ingredients as the those present in the sample from M/s GTPPL alone with an outright statement that the sample has characteristics of manufactured tobacco . It is to be noted that the reports of the CRCL. New Delhi on the samples from both M/s GTPPL and M/s SPPL have been declared after the filing of the appeal by the department, against the letter dated 11.07.2023 of the AAR. 7. In view of the above, the department has submitted the following additional grounds:- The correlation of the report of CRCL of samples collected from both M/s. GTPPL and M/s SPPL that when latter is declared as manufactured tobacco, the former is also to be considered as manufactured tobacco. The statements of the Directors of both the firms (who have admitted to following a mechanized process and adding other substances in the tobacco, both of the things were not approxed in the impugned ruling pronounced by the AAR Rajasthan) corroborated by videography done during the search proceedings. The department contended that M/s GTPPL has fraudulently obtained the ruling from RAA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by fraud or suppression of material facts, or misrepresentation of facts. The taxpayer on the other hand has raised preliminary objections on the maintainability of the instant appeal. 11. We have considered the rivals contentions. As maintainability of this appeal/petition has been questioned, this issue needs to be decided before any further consideration of the matter. 12. The authority finds that it has only two roles under the statutes viz. CGST Act, 2017 RGST Act. 2017. (i) to pronounce a Ruling on an appeal under Section 100 of the CGST Act. 2017 against an order of the AAR under Section 98(4) or 98(5) of the CGST Act. 2017. (ii) to declare any Ruling void ah initio under Section 104 of the CGST Act. 2017 in case the Ruling under Section 101 of the CGST Act. 2017 has been obtained by the appellant by fraud or suppression of material facts or misrepresentation of facts. 13. Therefore, it follows that the second role can come into play only when a Ruling in Appeal has been passed by this authority. Further, this Authority (AAAR) does not sit in judgment over orders of the AAR passed under Section 104 of the CGST Act. 2017. 14. In the instant case, this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
