2019 (11) TMI 533 - AAR - GST

Application for GST classification of flavoured milk rejected due to ongoing proceedings, incomplete fee payment

In Re: M/s. Anik Milk Products Private Limited

The Authority rejected the application seeking an advance ruling on the classification of flavoured milk under the GST Act, as it was not admissible under ... Maintainability of application - scope of Advance Ruling application - first Proviso to Section 98(2) of the GST Act 2017 - Classification of an item - processing of milk and milk products including flavoured milk - Whether flavoured milk is taxable at the rate of 5% under Schedule IV of the GST Act? HELD THAT:- There is no hesitation in concluding that the instant application is not maintainable in as much as it is hit by the provisions contained in first proviso to Section 98(2) of the Act. Accordingly, without going into the merits of the case, the application deserves to be rejected as not admissible in terms of first Proviso to Section 98(2) of the Act. Issues:Classification of flavoured milk under GST Act.Analysis:1. The applicant, engaged in processing milk products, sought an advance ruling on the classification of flavoured milk under the GST Act.2. The Authority noted that an enquiry by DGGI had been initiated against the applicant regarding the classification of flavoured milk before the application was filed.3. The questions raised before the Authority pertained to whether flavoured milk is taxable at 5% under Schedule IV of the GST Act.4. During the personal hearing, the applicant's representative confirmed receipt of summons from DGGI related to the issue raised before the Authority.5. The Authority pointed out that the application was not admissible under Section 98(2) of the CGST Act as the issue was already pending before another authority.6. The applicant failed to disclose the ongoing proceedings with DGGI in the application, attempting to circumvent the provisions of Section 98(2).7. The Authority found that the application was intentionally filed after the initiation of proceedings by DGGI, and the applicant had not paid the full fee for filing the application initially.8. Consequently, the Authority rejected the application as not maintainable under the first proviso to Section 98(2) of the Act without delving into the merits of the case.9. The ruling stated that the application was rejected as it was not admissible under the first proviso to Section 98(2) of the GST Act, as the issue was already pending before another authority when the application was made.This comprehensive analysis covers the issues involved in the legal judgment regarding the classification of flavoured milk under the GST Act and the rejection of the application by the Authority due to ongoing proceedings with another authority.