https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385026 The proviso to section 98(2) of the GST Act was held to apply only to the applicant before the AAR, so an earlier advance ruling in another person's case did not bar admission of the application. On classification, HDPE woven fabric coated or covered with LDPE or LLDPE melt was found not to retain textile character where the plastic coating was visible to the naked eye. It therefore did not fall under Heading 5903, and the tarpaulin made from it was also not classifiable under Heading 6306 or Heading 6301. en-us Mon, 26 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Mar 2025 17:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385026 The proviso to section 98(2) of the GST Act was held to apply only to the applicant before the AAR, so an earlier advance ruling in another person's case did not bar admission of the application. On classification, HDPE woven fabric coated or covered with LDPE or LLDPE melt was found not to retain textile character where the plastic coating was visible to the naked eye. It therefore did not fall under Heading 5903, and the tarpaulin made from it was also not classifiable under Heading 6306 or Heading 6301. Case-Laws GST Mon, 26 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385026