GST: Application not admissible for Advance ruling if question already pending before DGGSTI, rules AAR [Read Order]

Application - Advance ruling - question - DGGSTI - AAR - Taxscan

The Chennai Authority for Advance Ruling ( AAR ) has held that no Goods and Services Tax on printing of Pre and Post-examination items, and scanning and processing of results.

The applicant, Trident Pneumatics (p) ltd, are an approved vendor of the Indian Railways and is presently supplying a range of products. They have received orders for the manufacture and supply of Air Spring Failure Indication Cum Brake Application (FIBA) device to the Railways. They propose to Manufacture FIBA based on design specifications provided by Indian Railways

The application was filed u/s 98 necessitating an Advance ruling on the classification of Spring Failure Indication cum Brake Application (FIBA) proposed to be manufactured and supplied solely for use in Railways under Section XVII.

The Applicant has submitted the copy of the application in Form GST ARA – 01 and also submitted a copy of Challan evidencing payment of application fees of Rs.5, OOO/- each under sub-rule (1) of Rule 104 of CGST rules 2017 and SGST Rules 2017.

The department has classified the applicant’s product compressed Air Dryer under Chapter 84213990 and demanded a differential duty of Rs.3,66,295/- the same has been upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals), Coimbatore. The applicant paid the confirmed demanded amount along with interest. Further, the DGGI, Coimbatore Zonal Unit, has issued an SCN requiring the applicant to classify all products supplied to Railways under chapter84 instead of Chapter 86 and demanded about Rs.3 Crore being the differential duty.

The Coram found that the classification of FIBA, manufactured and supplied to Indian Railways by the applicant has been a part of the investigation proceedings under Authorisation for Inspection dated 01.05.2019 issued under Section 67 of the Act.

Shri T G Venkatesh, I.R.S., Additional Commissioner and Smt. K Latha Joint Commissioner (ST) didn’t admit the application filed u/s98(2) of the IGST Act since the question raised was a part of the proceedings of DGGSTI.

Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.

taxscan-loader