TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (4) TMI 614
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....trading of catalysts and catalytic converters. As regards catalysts, the petitioner classified such product under HSN Code: 38151290. As regards catalytic converters, the petitioner classified the same under HSN Code 84213990. In respect of such classification, the petitioner received a notice in Form GST ASMT-10 on 14.12.2023. Such notice was replied to on 12.01.2024. Thereafter, an intimation dated 21.02.2024 was issued and such intimation was replied to on 01.03.2024. The impugned show cause notices were issued thereafter on 15.03.2024. 3. Oral arguments on behalf of the petitioner were advanced by Mr. Vijay Narayan, learned senior counsel, and Mr.R.Parthasarthy, learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. The following submissions were mad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 5070 & 5071 of 2024, dated 01.03.2024, he contended that a similar challenge to show cause notices was considered and disposed of by directing the petitioner to reply to the show cause notice and by directing the assessing officer, to duly take note of the contentions and decide the same in an objective manner. ii) The order of the Commissioner of Central Excise pertained to a dispute as to whether a catalytic converter should be classified as a catalyst under Chapter 35 instead of Chapter 84. Therefore, learned Additional Government Pleader submits that the order does not support the contention of the petitioner that the catalytic converter should be classified under Chapter 84 and not Chapter 87. iii) As regards Section 74 being invo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d that the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Westinghouse Saxby does not apply to the case of the petitioner in view of Note 1 of the General Rules of Interpretation of this schedule. 8. It was further contended on behalf of the petitioner that the contentions of the petitioner are being disregarded as is evident from the repeated reference to Westinghouse Saxby in the intimation and show cause notices in spite of the reply to the ASMT-10 notice. On prima facie examination of the relevant documents, there is some merit in this contention. Therefore, it is made clear that it is incumbent on the respondent to duly consider all contentions raised by the petitioner objectively without any pre-determination while dealing with the pet....