2019 (10) TMI 273 - AAR - GST

Application for Advance Ruling on Chewing Tobacco Classification Rejected

The application seeking an advance ruling on the classification of a chewing tobacco product and the applicability of a specific notification was ... Classification of goods for levy of compensation cess - applicability of Compensation Cess Notification No.01/2017 - admissibility under the first proviso to Section 98(2) of the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017 - bar arising from pending proceedings before the jurisdictional authorityAdmissibility under the first proviso to Section 98(2) of the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017 - bar arising from pending proceedings before the jurisdictional authority - Application for advance ruling rejected because identical question was pending in proceedings before the jurisdictional authority at the time of filing. - HELD THAT: - The Authority examined the applicant's request on classification of their chewing tobacco and the applicability of the Compensation Cess Notification. The jurisdictional Commissioner furnished comments showing that adjudicatory and offence proceedings concerning the same question had been initiated prior to the filing of the advance ruling application. Under the first proviso to Section 98(2) of the CGST/TNGST Act 2017 the Authority is precluded from admitting an application where the question raised is already pending in any proceedings in the case of the applicant. As the proceedings were pending when the application was filed, the Authority was obliged to refuse admission and refrain from adjudicating the merits. [Paras 5, 6]Application rejected under the first proviso to Section 98(2) of the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017 on the ground that the question raised was already pending before the appropriate authority.Final Conclusion: The advance ruling application is refused and not adjudicated on merits because the same question was already the subject of pending proceedings before the jurisdictional authority at the time of filing; the applicant may challenge the order before the State Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling within the statutory period. Issues Involved:Classification of chewing tobacco product and applicability of Notification No.01/2017 - Compensation Cess - (Rate)Analysis:The applicant, a manufacturer of chewing tobacco, sought an advance ruling on the classification of their product and the applicability of a specific notification. They detailed their manufacturing process, emphasizing the absence of chemically flavored substances in their handmade product. They highlighted the historical imposition of central excise duty based on packaging methods and the lack of specific GST compensation cess for manual pack tobacco products in the current regime. The GST authorities attempted to classify their product under chemically flavored tobacco categories, leading to disputes over classification and cess levy.In response to the applicant's submission, the jurisdictional authority provided comments indicating ongoing proceedings against the applicant for short payment of Compensation Cess and reclassification demands. The authority noted that the applicant's issue was already under consideration by the jurisdictional authority before the application for advance ruling was filed. Citing the relevant legal provisions, the authority rejected the application, stating that issues already pending before appropriate authorities cannot be admitted for advance ruling.The ruling emphasized the legal provision prohibiting the admission of applications where the issue is already pending before the jurisdictional authority. Consequently, the application seeking an advance ruling on the classification of the chewing tobacco product and the applicability of a specific notification was rejected due to the pre-existence of proceedings on the same matter.