9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 312X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons 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 is filed under section 100 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the GGST Act, 2017 by M/s. Manishaben Vipulbhai Sorathiya (for short 'Appellant') against the Advance Ruling No. GUJ/GAAR/R/2023/10 dated 9.3.2023. 3. Briefly, the facts are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture & supply of floor mats for four wheel motor vehicles [cars], which are essentially made of PVC [poly vinyl chloride] material. 4. As per the appellant, the PVC f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ace] of one floor mat which is for the vehicle driver's side. 6. The appellant before the GAAR therefore, contended that the floor mat for four wheel motor vehicles [cars] would merit classification under CTH 3918, as the product in question is a floor covering of plastic. 7. In view of the foregoing facts, the appellant sought Advance Ruling on the following questions, viz: What is the appropriate classification & rate of GST applicable on supply of PVC floor mats [Cars] under CGST and GGST? 8. Consequent to hearing the applicant, the GAAR [Gujarat Authority Advance Ruling], recorded the following findings viz: * appellant's product is an admixture of PVC leather, PU Foam [polyurethane foam], XLPE foam; that cotton thread an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cessories which are not suitable for use solely or principally with the articles of Chapters 86 to 88 are excluded; that in the present case, the floor mats used for four wheel motor vehicles [cars] supplied by the applicant, is principally for use in motor vehicles; * the parts and accessories of chapter 87 include floor mats; that it is not the applicant's case that his product falls within this exception mentioned in the HSN. * that appellants reliance on the case of Uni Products India Ltd. [2020 (116) taxmann.com 401(SC)] is not tenable owing to the aforementioned facts and also nowhere it is claimed that the production process in respect of their product was similar to the once mentioned in the said judgement. 9. The GAAR, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the most specific description; * that floor mats in question have been excluded from 8708 via explanatory notes. 11. Personal hearing in the matter was held on 21.01.2025 wherein Shri Chintan Kotadiya, CA and Shri Dharmesh Kotadiya appeared and reiterated the submissions made in the appeal. The submitted additional submissions during the course of personal hearing, reiterating the grounds already mentioned. They also relied upon the case of M/s. Uni Products India Ltd². FINDINGS:- 12. We have carefully gone through and considered the appeal papers, written submissions filed by the appellant, submissions made at the time of personal hearing, the impugned Advance Ruling and other materials available on record. 13. We note that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the first time before an appellate authority cannot be entertained in terms of the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. I.T.C. Ltd 2004 (171) EL 433 SC. 14. Doubtless the principle of res judicata is a fundamental doctrine of law that there must be an end to litigation. (See Daryao v. The State of U.P., [1962] 1 SCR 574 but the plea of res judicata has to be specifically and expressly raised. (See Medapati Surayya v. Tondapu Bala Gangadhara Ramakrishna Reddi, AIR 35 (1948) PC 3, 7. This view has been recently reiterated in V. Rajeshwari v. T.C. Saravanabava, (2003) 10 Scale 768, where it is said that the foundation of the plea of res judicata must be laid in the pleadings. If this was not done, no party would be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appellant that floor mats in question have been excluded from 8708 via explanatory notes already stands answered by GAAR as under: * the parts and accessories of chapter 87 include floor mats (other than of textile material or unhardened vulcanized rubber), etc.. It is not the applicant's case that his product falls within this exception mentioned in the HSN. Further, the reliance on the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Uni Products Ltd, ibid also stands addressed in para 27of the impugned order. 17. What is not controverted by the appellant is the detailed reasoning given in para 25 of the impugned order, classifying the product under chapter 8708. 18. We find that the GAAR vide its impugned ruling corr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
