Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + AAAR GST - 2019 (10) TMI AAAR This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (10) TMI 208 - AAAR - GSTCondonation of delay in filing appeal - Classification of goods - Kalva raksha sutra - present appeal is against the ruling in as much as the original authority has stated that the product manufactured by the appellant is not ‘Kalava Raksha sutra’ but skeins of braided yarn of various compositions - appeal was filed beyond statutory limit - HELD THAT:- As per proviso to Section 100(2), the Appellate Authority if satisfied that the appellant was prevented by a sufficient cause from presenting the appeal within the appeal period of thirty days can allow it to be presented within a further period not exceeding thirty days. In the case at hand, the appeal is filed within the statutory period though incomplete which has been made good within the further period of thirty days provided in the said proviso. Hence the lacuna is condoned and the appeal is taken up on merits. Classification of goods - Kalva raksha sutra - HELD THAT:- In the case at hand the appellant is not aggrieved with the ruling of the Lower authority but aggrieved with the remarks of the lower authority in Para 4 of the Ruling of the authority, which according to them affect their entitlement to the exemption under Notification No. 2/2017-C.t.(Rate) dated 28.06.2017 as amended. We find that the lower authority has not observed/ruled on the eligibility of exemption to their product in the Ruling under appeal. We also find that the Lower Authority has ruled on the classification of the product manufactured by the appellant, which is not under dispute, therefore as per the provisions of Section 100(1) of the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017 no appeal, per se lies before this Authority. It is further clear that the issue dealt with was not “whether the product manufactured by the appellant is ‘Kalava’ or ‘not” or for that matter, the ruling do not delve on what makes a kalava and how the product is not a ‘kalava’. In as much as the issue raised before the lower authority do not involve the above and factually the lower authority has not dealt with the above, we find justice best served by expunging of the above remarks of the lower authority in the ruling. The remarks of the lower authority may be treated as expunged/deleted - The ruling of the Lower authority is maintained.
|