Case Law Details
In re M/s. Saro Enterprises (GST AAAR Tamilnadu)
In the case at hand, the product, ‘Agricultural Seedling Tray’, is made up of Plastics and not of any of the base metals specified in the section notes as stated by the Appellant themselves. The contention of the Appellant is that the trays are used for germination of paddy and therefore, the product is to be considered as a ‘Hand tool used for agriculture’ and classified under 8201. We find that Chapter 82 covers only those tools made of base metals; The construction of description 8201 is a typical one attracting the application of the principle of `ejusdem generis’ for interpretation of the phrase “Other tools of a kind used in agriculture,..”. The `ejusdem generis’ principle specifies that “general terms following particular expressions take their colour and meaning as that of the preceding expressions”. Applying this, we find that in Chapter 8201, the specifics are spades, shovels, mattocks, picks, hoes, forks and rakes, axes, bill hooks and similar hewing tools; secateurs and pruners of any kind; scythes, sickles, hay knives, hedge shears, timber wedges and the subsequent phrase “and other tools of a kind used in agriculture…” is a general expression following the specific enumeration. The specifics mentioned are all of which has a working edge as required for a tool to be classified under this chapter. Thus only those hand tools which are of base metal and has a working edge, used as a hand tool in agriculture merits classification under this residual entry. The product at hand is neither made of base metal nor has a working edge as required of a tool under this chapter and therefore the product is not to be classified under Chapter 8201.
The Appellants in the grounds of appeal have stated that the seedling trays, though made of plastics are used only for agriculture and therefore is to be considered as a hand tool of a kind used in agriculture and classified under 8201 with tax exemptions. Classification under a Heading is to be governed only by the relevant Tariff-entries, Heading-description, etc. Heading 8201, as discussed above, do not envisage that all items used for agriculture would be covered therein but specifically as given in the General Explanatory Notes to Chapter 82, mentioned above, are to be classified based on the constituent material it is made of. We find that the lower authority has considered the above and accordingly pronounced the Ruling. We do not find any reason to interfere with the same.
FULL TEXT OF ORDER OF APPELLATE AUTHORITY OF ADVANCE RULING,TAMIL NADU
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 Service Tax Act would also mean a reference to the same provisions under the Tamil Nadu Goods and Service Tax Act.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
