Issue:
Bug: [REFACTOR] : [CryptoPay] Error Message For Connector Implementation



### :memo: Feature Description

- In terms of errors, we are currently throwing a 'not supported' message, which shouldn't be the case as we are yet to decide on the implementation.


### :hammer: Possible Implementation

- In order to manage payment methods that are not implemented by Hyperswitch or yet to be implemented, the connector transformers file should make use of the NotImplemented ConnectorError enum variant.
- By doing so, we will throw same error message for all the Connector Implementation 
- You can check this PR for further reference https://github.com/juspay/hyperswitch/pull/2831


:bookmark: Note: All the changes needed should be contained within `hyperswitch/crates/router/src/connector/`


### :package: Have you spent some time checking if this feature request has been raised before?

- [X] I checked and didn't find a similar issue

### :package: Have you read the Contributing Guidelines?

- [X] I have read the [Contributing Guidelines](https://github.com/juspay/hyperswitch/blob/main/docs/CONTRIBUTING.md)

### :sparkles: Are you willing to submit a PR?


Pull request description:
## Type of Change
<!-- Put an `x` in the boxes that apply -->

- [ ] Bugfix
- [ ] New feature
- [ ] Enhancement
- [x] Refactoring
- [ ] Dependency updates
- [ ] Documentation
- [ ] CI/CD

## Description
<!-- Describe your changes in detail -->


### Additional Changes

- [ ] This PR modifies the API contract
- [ ] This PR modifies the database schema
- [ ] This PR modifies application configuration/environment variables

<!--
Provide links to the files with corresponding changes.

Following are the paths where you can find config files:
1. `config`
2. `crates/router/src/configs`
3. `loadtest/config`
-->


## Motivation and Context
<!--
Why is this change required? What problem does it solve?
If it fixes an open issue, please link to the issue here.

If you don't have an issue, we'd recommend starting with one first so the PR
can focus on the implementation (unless it is an obvious bug or documentation fix
that will have little conversation).
-->


## How did you test it?
<!--
Did you write an integration/unit/API test to verify the code changes?
Or did you test this change manually (provide relevant screenshots)?
-->


## Checklist
<!-- Put an `x` in the boxes that apply -->

- [x] I formatted the code `cargo +nightly fmt --all`
- [x] I addressed lints thrown by `cargo clippy`
- [x] I reviewed the submitted code
- [ ] I added unit tests for my changes where possible
- [ ] I added a [CHANGELOG](/CHANGELOG.md) entry if applicable

Resolve #2839 

Testing:

Patch:
diff --git a/crates/router/src/connector/cryptopay/transformers.rs b/crates/router/src/connector/cryptopay/transformers.rs
index 3af604c786b..4102945b201 100644
--- a/crates/router/src/connector/cryptopay/transformers.rs
+++ b/crates/router/src/connector/cryptopay/transformers.rs
@@ -82,10 +82,9 @@ impl TryFrom<&CryptopayRouterData<&types::PaymentsAuthorizeRouterData>>
             | api_models::payments::PaymentMethodData::Voucher(_)
             | api_models::payments::PaymentMethodData::GiftCard(_)
             | api_models::payments::PaymentMethodData::CardToken(_) => {
-                Err(errors::ConnectorError::NotSupported {
-                    message: utils::SELECTED_PAYMENT_METHOD.to_string(),
-                    connector: "CryptoPay",
-                })
+                Err(errors::ConnectorError::NotImplemented(
+                    utils::get_unimplemented_payment_method_error_message("CryptoPay"),
+                ))
             }
         }?;
         Ok(cryptopay_request)