Case Law Details
In re Arvind Kumar Agrawa (GST AAAR Odisha)
In the Customs Tariff, goods of the same class have been grouped together. Also, the residuary items have been provided separately for each class of goods under each chapter. The Notes to the Tariff, giving explanation to the scope and ambit of the respective chapter have statutory backing. In the appeal petition, the appellant has stated that “Gudakhu” manufactured by them is intended to be used as a tooth paste. No-where, the appellant contends that the “Gudakhu” being dealt by them are intended for smoking, which is an essential requirement to qualify for classification under sub-heading 240311. Hookah or Gudaku tobacco intended for smoking is only classifiable under 24031110. By applying the interpretative rules, which are statutory guidelines for interpreting the tariff and taking into consideration the relevant sub-heading note, we are in agreement with the rulings of the Advance Ruling Authority that “Gudakhu” being manufactured by the Appellant for use as a tooth paste is appropriately classifiable under residuary tariff item 2403 9990.
Views of consultants or publications not supported by statutory provisions not legally tenable
The appellant in its ground of appeal has also contended that their stand is substantiated by opinions from legal experts and opinion from a leading GST Journal. In this regard, we are of the view that the views of the consultants or publications which are not supported by statutory provisions are not legally tenable. Thus, the appellant’s contentions in this regard are invalid.
The appellant has also contended about higher rate of Compensation Cess for sub-heading 2403 9990 vis-a-vis 24031110. In this regard, we are of the considered view that, fixation of rate of duty is beyond the scope of this forum.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
