Case Title | M/s JVS Foods Pvt Ltd |
Court | Rajasthan AAAR |
Honorable Judges | Member Sh.Pramod Kumar Singh & Member DR.Preetam B.Yashvant |
Citation | 2020 (04) GSTPanacea 33 HC Rajasthan RAJ/AAAR/6/2019-20 |
Judgement Date | 01-April-2020 |
Council for Petitioner | Samir Jain Sumit Bhargave |
Council for Respondent | NA |
Section | Section 100 |
In Favour of | In Favour of Revenue |
The Rajasthan bench of Member Sh.Pramod Kumar Singh & Member DR.Preetam B.Yashvant has held that bench arrive at the conclusion that the FRK manufactured by the appellant do not have essential character of natural Rice and also does not merit classification under Chapter 10 in terms of Chapter Note 1 (A) of the said Chapter. It is appropriately classifiable under the sub-heading of Chapter 19 i.e. under Chapter sub-heading 19049000.
FACTS OF THE CASE
The appellant is producer of the Institutional Foods in the State of Rajasthan, catering to the requirement of United Nation Food Aid Agency, World Food Program not only in India but also in the neighboring country as well. The appellant is also one of the suppliers to the State Nodal Departments like Women & Child Development Department for distribution to beneficiaries of the Central Government approved Integrated Child Development Service Scheme (ICDS) and Mid-Day Meals (MDM) etc
The appellant is also manufacturer and supplier of Energy Food, Babymix, Indiamix, Paushtik Puffs, Halwa premixes, Khichdi Premixes, Barfi Premix etc., all these products are made of various food grains and fortified with vitamins & minerals.
The appellant preferred an application for Advance Ruling before the Rajasthan Authority for Advance Ruling (hereinafter referred to as the ‘MR’), for declaring the goods manufactured and sold by the appellant i.e., Fortified Rice Kernels (hereinafter referred to as ‘FRK’ in short), to be taxable under Chapter Heading 10 tariff item 1006 as Rice and description of goods 10061090 other (IGST NIL/5%, CGST NIL/2.5%, SGST NIL/2.5%). The process to fortify rice was also comprehensively laid before the AAR along with the statutory and mandatory requirement of Food Safety and Standards Authority of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, whereby the appellant tried to convince that the FRK is nothing but a better nutritional form of Rice
The Rajasthan Authority for Advance Ruling, vide Advance Ruling No. RAJ/AAR/2019-20/27 dated 28.11.2019 has held that Fortified Rice Kernels (FRK), manufactured and supplied by the applicant is classifiable under HSN 19049090 and attracts GST 18% (SGST 9% + CGST 9%).
Aggrieved by the aforesaid Ruling above, the appellant has preferred the present appeal
COURT HELD
Considering the facts as recorded, held that bench find that the product FRK does not fall in the category of “Puffed rice, commonly known as Muri, flattened or beaten rice, commonly known as Chira, parched rice, commonly known as khoi, parched paddy or rice coated with sugar or gur, commonly known as Murki”.
In view of above bench arrive at the conclusion that the FRK manufactured by the appellant do not have essential character of natural Rice and also does not merit classification under Chapter 10 in terms of Chapter Note 1 (A) of the said Chapter. It is appropriately classifiable under the sub-heading of Chapter 19 i.e. under Chapter sub-heading 19049000
ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGEMENT
Bench find that the product FRK does not fall in the category of “Puffed rice, commonly known as Muri, flattened or beaten rice, commonly known as Chira, parched rice, commonly known as khoi, parched paddy or rice coated with sugar or gur, commonly known as Murki”.
In view of above we arrive at the conclusion that the FRK manufactured by the appellant do not have essential character of natural Rice and also does not merit classification under Chapter 10 in terms of Chapter Note 1 (A) of the said Chapter. It is appropriately classifiable under the sub-heading of Chapter 19 i.e. under Chapter sub-heading 19049000.
While arriving to the above conclusion, we have considered all the relevant arguments and submissions put forth by the appellant. We don’t find their submissions, mentioned at Para 6 (vi and vii) above, relevant to the present appeal.
The appeal stands disposed accordingly.
Download PDF:
M/s JVS Foods Pvt Ltd
For Reference Visit:
Rajashtan High Court
Read Another Case Law:
GST Case Law