In re A Raymond Fasteners India Pvt. Ltd (GST AAAR Maharashtra)
The Maharasthra Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling set aside the Advance Ruling No. GST-ARA-47/2019-20/B-33, dated 17.03.2020, pronounced by the MAAR. Further hold that the impugned goods, i.e., Metal Nuts with metrical threading, Metal Nuts without metrical threading, and Metal Spring Nuts, will be considered as parts of motor vehicles falling under Chapter Heading from 87.01 to 87.05, and accordingly will merit classification under the Tariff Item 8708 99 00, as purported by the Appellant. Thus, the subject Appeal filed by the Department is allowed.
FULL TEXT OF ORDER OF APPELLATE AUTHORITY OF ADVANCE RULING,MAHARASHTRA
(Proceedings under Section 101 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017)
1. At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the CGST Act and the MGST Act are the same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the CGST Act would also mean a reference to the same provisions under the MGST Act.
2. The present appeal has been filed under Section 100 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act. 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act. 2017 [hereinafter referred to as “the CGST Act and MGST Act” respectively] by the Deputy Commissioner. Division – IV (Chakan), Pune-1 Commissionerate (“the Appellant”) against the Advance Ruling No. GST- GST-ARA-47/2019-20/B-33, dated 17.03.2020, pronounced by the Maharashtra Authority for Advance Ruling (hereinafter referred to as “the MAAR”).
BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE
3.1 M/s. A Raymond Fasteners India Pvt. Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as “the Respondent”) having registered address at Gate No.259, 276/8B. Nighoje Chakan. Tal-Khed, Pune-410501, is engaged in the manufacture of the Industrial clips and fasteners, which are used bv their customers, dealing in the manufacture of automobiles, electrical appliances, solar energy equipment, etc.
3.2 The Respondent, vide application, dated 27.9.2019. had filed an application before the MAAR seeking Advance Ruling in respect of ten questions pertaining to classification of the goods manufactured by them. The MAAR, vide Ruling No. GST-AR V47 2019-20/B-33, dated 17.03.2020. answered the first question sought by the Appellant. The remaining nine questions were not answered by the MAAR. stating that the Applicant had raised multiple questions requesting for classification of many product which cannot be clubbed into one single category, therefore, the Respondent should have applied for each product individually since classification is sought for each individual product. The MAAR took up only the Respondent’s query with respect to the first question, which is being mentioned as under: –
Q.1.Whether threaded metal nuts which function same as standard nuts, merit classification under the Tariff item 7318 16 00 and not under Tariff item 8708 99 00?
3.3 The MAAR. vide its Ruling dated 17.03.2020. held that the threaded metal nuts merits classification under the Tariff Item 7318 16 00 and not under the Tariff Item 8708 99 00. The MAAR has based the aforesaid ruling to the provisions laid under the section Note 2(b) of Section XVII, which stales that the expressions “parts” and “parts and accessories ” do not apply to parts of general use, as defined in Note 2 to Section XV, of base metal (Section XV), thereby, holding that the subject goods which are parts of general use, are barred from being considered as “parts and accessories” of motor vehicles, as the said goods were used in many fields including electronic goods, solar energy and vehicles. “
3.4 Aggrieved by the aforesaid Advance Ruling passed by the MAAR, the Jurisdictional Officer. Deputy Commissioner. Division – IV (Chakan), Pune-I Commissionerate, has preferred the present appeal before the Maharashtra Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (hereinafter referred to as “the MAAAR”) on the following grounds:
GROUNDS OF APPEAL
4. The Appellant, in its appeal memorandum, inter alia, has mentioned the following grounds of appeal:
4.1 That the facts have been misrepresented by the Respondent before the MAAR that the goods in question i.e. metal nuts (with or without metrical threads) are essential similar to standard nuts and may be used in other industries apart from automobiles/vehicles. However, it is revealed that the goods in question, i.e. threaded metal nuts or the fasteners, are manufactured and supplied to automobile manufacturers/customers as per the specifications required by the customers and drawings as approved by their automobile customers. Accordingly, the purchase orders are issued by the customers for the fasteners required by them as per their specifications. Sample design in respect of the ‘Metal Nut’, required by M/s. Tata Motors Ltd.. Purchase Orders issued by Tata Motors Ltd. to the Respondent, and the relevant invoices issued by the Respondent are evidence to this fact.
4.2 That the MAAR’s Ruling, dated 17.03.2020, has not taken note of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of G.S. Auto International Ltd. Versus Collector of C. Ex., Chandigarh, 2003 (152) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.), wherein while examining the classification of the identical goods, the Apex Court held as under:
22. So far as Civil Appeal No. 5711 of 1999 is concerned, the classification of goods was done under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (for the post-1986 period). The competing Heading numbers are 73.18 and 87.08, which reads as under: –
