TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (12) TMI 50
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the Act shall be binding only (a) On the applicant who had sought it in respect of any matter referred to in sub-section (2) of Section 97 for advance ruling; (b) On the concerned officer or the jurisdictional officer in respect of the applicant. 3. Under Section 103 (2) of the Act, this advance ruling shall be binding unless the law, facts or circumstances supporting the said advance ruling have changed. 4. Under Section 104(1) of the Act, where the Appellate Authority finds that advance ruling pronounced by it under sub-section (1) of Section 101 has been obtained by the appellant by fraud or suppression of material facts or misrepresentation of facts, it may, by order, declare such ruling to be void sb-initio and thereupon all the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder shall apply to the appellant as if such advance ruling has never been made. At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the Central Goods and Service Tax Act and the Tamil Nadu Goods and Service Tax Act are the same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the Central Goods and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ther in Department or court proceedings during PH on 22nd May 2019 before the lower authority, the said authority has rejected the application for the reason that proceedings are pending. 5. The appellant has furnished the Statement of Facts and Interpretation of Facts before this Authority as follows: * Their application was accepted and AAR satisfied that there is no pending issues in the subjected matter or matter already decided either in Department or court proceedings. * During Personal Hearing held on 22nd May 2019 before the Lower Authority, they displayed the relevant sample and elaborated in detail as regards how their products are being classified with that of chemically flavoured tobacco products of dry varieties in the form of tobacco products(without lime tube) and tobacco products(with lime tube). * Even after submission of all details in relation to passing on the appropriate ruling as regards the classification of product and applicable GST compensation cess, AAR have come out with qualification remarks after the gap of 6 months from the date of filing their application in entertaining their prayer and refused to provide the ruling causing remark on the fact....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....* They have made representation before the CBIC TRU through their Tobacco Association in TamilNadu during the month of Sep' 2018 in relation to the levy of GST compensation cess for the product of unmanufactured tobacco. Meanwhile, they are following the practice of paying GST compensation cess for residual variety of tobacco products under self-assessment basis. At this juncture, there are certain other petitions made by their competitors engaging in manufacturing 'manufactured tobacco' to the same CBIC TRU against the manufacturers of 'unmanufactured tobacco' like them complaining about the short payment of GST resorted for the supply of goods. As the result of which GST Authorities in the State of Tamilnadu have started inquiring about the supply of goods made by all kind of manufacturers of tobacco products in the State of Tamil Nadu upon the direction of the TRU CBIC. Hence, their unit is not exemption to this and therefore the concerned Jurisdictional Authority had summoned them on 9th Jan'2019 calling for certain details in respect of details of supply made by them from the date of introduction of GST till Dec'2018. * The Jurisdictional GST authorities again summoned them ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Veeram Natural Products(Tamilnadu) (b). Sasan Power Ltd (Madhya Pradesh) (c). Crux Bio Tech India P. Ltd (Andhra Pradesh) and Sterlite Technologies Ltd (Maharashtra). In respect of these cases, the application is rejected at the time of admission and that too with the judicial proceedings of giving proper opportunities to the party for their view heard in person. * No such proceedings as mentioned in Section 98 of CGST Act have been followed by Hon'ble AAR in providing the ruling * The issue in question is already pending as ruling pronounced by the Hon'ble AAR cannot be accepted since question or enquiry about the description of the product manufactured by them is not at all considered when initiation of proceedings for short fall in payment of GST through summon dated 9th Jan 2019. Hence the question raised in the application under consideration cannot be termed as the same as in a matter already pending before the authority for rejection of their application by Hon'ble AAR. Discussions: 7. We have carefully considered the various submissions made by the Appellant and the applicable statutory provisions. The issue before us for determination is whether, the rejection of th....