Shatamrut Chyavan’ is classified under HSN 23099010 and attracting nil rate of tax
Classification of goods— In the instant case, the appellant is engaged in manufacturing and marketing a product called Shatamrut Chyavan’ which is a supplementary product, which increases the nutritional value of the molasses, and known as ‘compounded animal feed’.
The present appeal has been filed against the advance ruling pronounced by the Maharashtra Authority for Advance Ruling.
MAAR has been held that the subject product, involved in the application, is rightly classified by the Appellant under chapter heading 2309, attracting ‘NIL’ rate as per Sl. No. 102 of the Notification No. 02/2017- C.T. (Rate), dated 28.6.2017 and discarded the second question asked by the Appellant, stating that the same is not in relation to the supply of goods or services or both, being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the Appellant, and thereby, holding that the said question is outside the ambit of Section 97(2) of the CGST Act, 2017. and therefore, need not be answered.
Held that— We, hereby, uphold the Ruling passed wherein it was held that the subject product, involved in the application, was rightly classified by the Appellant under chapter heading 2309, attracting ‘NIL rate as per SI. No. 102 of the Notification No. 02/2017 C.T. (Rate), dated 28.6.2017.
we agree with the conclusion drawn by the MAAR that the question does not fall within the purview of Section 97(2) of the CGST Act. 2017. The question is not in relation to supply of goods or services or both, being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the Appellant. The MAAR cannot decide whether a specific product can be said to be a waste of sugar manufacture as the said question is not within the scope of Section 97 of the CGST Act. 2017.
Shatamrut Chyavan’ is classified under HSN 23099010 and attracting nil rate of tax
Classification of goods— In the instant case, the appellant is engaged in manufacturing and marketing a product called Shatamrut Chyavan’ which is a supplementary product, which increases the nutritional value of the molasses, and known as ‘compounded animal feed’.
The present appeal has been filed against the advance ruling pronounced by the Maharashtra Authority for Advance Ruling.
MAAR has been held that the subject product, involved in the application, is rightly classified by the Appellant under chapter heading 2309, attracting ‘NIL’ rate as per Sl. No. 102 of the Notification No. 02/2017- C.T. (Rate), dated 28.6.2017 and discarded the second question asked by the Appellant, stating that the same is not in relation to the supply of goods or services or both, being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the Appellant, and thereby, holding that the said question is outside the ambit of Section 97(2) of the CGST Act, 2017. and therefore, need not be answered.
Held that— We, hereby, uphold the Ruling passed wherein it was held that the subject product, involved in the application, was rightly classified by the Appellant under chapter heading 2309, attracting ‘NIL rate as per SI. No. 102 of the Notification No. 02/2017 C.T. (Rate), dated 28.6.2017.
we agree with the conclusion drawn by the MAAR that the question does not fall within the purview of Section 97(2) of the CGST Act. 2017. The question is not in relation to supply of goods or services or both, being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the Appellant. The MAAR cannot decide whether a specific product can be said to be a waste of sugar manufacture as the said question is not within the scope of Section 97 of the CGST Act. 2017.