Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
Bars
Logo TaxTMI
>
×

By creating an account you can:

Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2024 (3) TMI 741

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....input tax credit shall be made, unless the appellant has been given an opportunity of being heard. 2. Under Section 103(1) of the Act, this Advance ruling pronounced by the Appellate Authority under Chapter XVII 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 ab-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....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt Plant (P) Limited preferred the subject appeal. In the grounds of appeal, they stated, inter alia, that * The order of the learned AAR is against the facts of the case and against the principles of natural justice and interpretation of the law. * The learned AAR failed to appreciate the nature of processing carried out by the applicant and failed to consider that the minerals and hardness are removed in the processing to make the output fit for reuse. * The learned AAR erred in equating the plant run by the applicant to process effluents with sewage water treatment plants and relying on the circular issued for the purpose of sewage plants when there are inherent differences in the processing as well as output which is characterized as Trade permeate, MEE condensate in TN pollution control board consent order. * The learned AAR erred in holding that the output is classifiable as Water under heading 2201 after observing Effluent water does not fit under Chapter 22 as it is not fit for human consumption under the heading "Beverages, Spirits and Vinegar" * The learned AAR failed to provide an opportunity to the applicant to make submissions to the materials relied on by th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... etc. and the total dissolved solids is 7932 mg/1. * The effluent is subject to extensive processing at the treatment plant which includes equalization, biological aeration, nitrification, denitrification, biological degradation, secondary clarifier, oxidation reduction, filtration, evaporation. * The intention of the processing is to achieve zero liquid discharge as mandated by the Madras High Court and to make the resulting products fully reusable in the dyeing industries. The outputs of the processing are the following and* the mode of disposal / usage as per the consent order of Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board are as follows:- * That they had applied for advanced ruling including the query regarding the correct classification of RO Permeate, MEE condensate (Trade effluent II); that at the time of filing the application, they had applied under the name "Water" falling under heading 2201 and the advanced ruling authority passed the order grouping the product as Water [other than aerated, mineral, distilled, medicinal, ionic, battery, demineralized and water sold in sealed container] under heading 2201 with 'NIL' rate of tax. * Now they state that the classifica....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... treated sewage water under the heading 2201 is not applicable to the RO permeate. This has been upheld by Gujarat AAR in case of Palsano Enviro while holding, "This clearly shows the intention of the legislature that any type of water which are being sold in terms of commercial purpose have been kept out of the purview of exemption as provided under entry No. 99 of the Notification." d) Therefore the RO permeate, do not get covered under the Chapter 22, "Beverages, Spirits, Vinegars", and that the same is classifiable under either of the following headings, viz., 2853 00 99 - Other Inorganic Compounds Since the RO permeate which is not fit for human consumption does not have the characteristic of water covered under 2201, it is classifiable under this residuary head. Comparable products like distilled water, conductivity water are grouped here. 2201 - Demineralised water Without prejudice the above, if in the opinion of authority, it is classifiable as water under 2201, the RO permeate is to be treated as 'Demineralised water' since most of the minerals and chemical elements including Phosphate, Fluoride, Nitrate, Iron, Silica are reduced to non-deductible or ver....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., wherein the applicant had furnished additional grounds/documents in respect of their appeal, which has been reproduced in detail in para 5 above. 6.4 Under the additional submissions made, the appellant brings to our attention that * they have submitted the test report No. V2300446A dated 12.10.2023 in their own case issued by "The South Indian Textile Research Association", an organization supported by Ministry of Textiles, which classifies the product as RO Permeate Industrial Use and not for human consumption. * Further, as per the 'Consent Order' issued by the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, the name of the product has been specified as RO Permeate, and the only specified use permitted, is reuse by the member units, i.e., the dyeing units. * The advanced ruling authority has erred in equating sewage treatment plant with the effluent treatment plant run by the appellant whereby they have failed to appreciate the fact that the characteristics of the dyeing effluent and sewage are entirely different. Further the norms for sewage plants are different, as the treated sewage water is allowed to be permitted to be used for irrigation, discharged into water bodies,....