States GST & VAT - QUESTION : Applicant is running a taking auction for collection of human hair from the Hindu Temple, which is controlled by the HR & CE Department. That the devotees from the public visit the Temple for having darshan of the deity in the said temple. Various activities take place in connection with the visit of the devotees of the Hindu Faith and such activities are managed by the HR&CE Department for the effective management of the Temple. The devotee prays to the deity and give the sacrifice of human hair or tonsuring with deep cultural, religious and social significance with reason various traditions. The applicant sought advance ruling on the following questions: 1. Whether, the Auction amount that is collected by the Temple Authorities, which is controlled by the HR & CE Department for collection of human hair falls within the ambit of section 7 of CGST Act. 2. Whether the Temple is business premises. 3. Sate of Human hair is exempted from GST Tax liabilities, and whether as a consequence the Auction amount paid to the Temple for conducting the activity of collection of hair is also exempted. RULING : 1. Yes, the amount collected by the temple towards issue of license to collect human hair from temple premises is a supply of service and falls within the ambit of section 7 of the CGST Act, 2017. 2. The query raised by the applicant does not get covered under any of the sub-clauses from (a) to (g) of section 97(2) of the CGST Act, 2017. 3. No, the exemption of GST is on sale of goods being human hair. The amount charged by the temple for license to collect human hair from the temple premises is towards supply of service. The licensing activity is not covered under the exemption Notification and is liable to be taxed. Rangaraj (Chelliah Rangaraj), In re (2026) 130 ITPJ (SG) 517 (AAR) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : Applicant operates an E-commerce platform that connects vehicle owners/drivers (referred to as transporters) with customers who require transportation services for their goods. Customers can book transporters through the online portal or mobile app of the applicant, which is currently under development. Transporters can register on the platform by making a pre-deposit, which is used to cover the commission owned to the applicant for facilitating bookings. The commission is deducted from the transporters pre-deposit each time they complete a transportation job booked through the platform. Transporters are required to recharge their pre-deposit once it is depleted by commission deductions. However, they are allowed to continue accepting bookings through the platform even if their pre-deposit balance becomes negative, upto a limit of Rs. 100. The applicant sought advance ruling on the following questions: (i) Whether the applicant satisfies the definition of an “Electronic commerce operator” or do they satisfy the definition of “Goods Transport Agency”? (ii) What is the taxability of services provided by the applicant? RULING : (i) The applicant satisfies the definition of an ‘economic commerce operator’ and all the related provisions are required to be followed. The applicant do not satisfy the definition of ‘Goods Transport Agent’ as discussed in para - 8 above. (ii) In addition to paying GST on the commission received from the transporters, all the provisions of section 52 are required to be followed. A.V. Cargo Migrators LLP, In re (2026) 130 ITPJ (SG) 516 (AAR) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : The applicants are engaged in providing outdoor catering services that do not involve hotel accommodation and are not located in any specified premises. Their services include two distinct categories of supply: They provide composite outdoor catering services that involve both the supply of prepared food and deployment of manpower for serving and on-site event support. They also undertake supply of food for occasional events where the food is prepared at their premises and delivered to the customer’s location without any involvement of labour or on-site service. The responsibility of the goods transfers at the time of dispatch or delivery, and the service does not involve any catering activity at the recipient’s premises. The Applicant had made a payment of application fees of Rs. 5,000 each under sub-rule (1) of rule 104 of CGST Rules, 2017 and SGST Rules, 2017. The applicant sought advance ruling on the following questions: (i) Whether they have the option to either: (a) Pay GST at the rate of 2.5% CGST and 2.5% SGST without availing Input Tax Credit (ITC), or (b) Pay GST at the rate of 9% CGST and 9% SGST with availing ITC, as per Notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate), dated 28-6-2017, as amended by Notification No. 20/2019-Central Tax (Rate), dated 30-9-2019, effective from. 01-10-2019. (ii) What is the applicable GST rate for food supply services provided for occasional events, where no labour or on-site services are involved, and the food is prepared at their own premises and transported to the recipient’s location at their own risk? (iii) What is the applicable HSN Code? RULING : (i) (a) The applicant is required to pay tax on the supply of service involving food, at the rate of 5% (2.5% CGST and 2.5% SGST) as per S1. No. 7(iv) of the Notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-6-2017, as amended, with a condition that credit of input tax charged on goods and services used in supplying the service has not been taken. (b) The applicant does not have an option of paying GST at the rate of 9% CGST and 9% SGST, along with availment of ITC. (ii) The applicable GST rate for food supply services provided for occasional events, where no labour or onsite services are involved, and the food is prepared at applicant’s premises and transported to the location at recipient’s risk, is 5% (2.5% CGST and 2.5% SGST) as per SI. No. 7(iv) of the Notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-6-2017, as amended, with a condition that credit of input tax charged on goods and services used in supplying the service has not been taken. (iii) The applicable HSN Code (SAC) for both the models of supply of food carried out by the applicant is 996334. Friends Catering CBE, In re (2026) 130 ITPJ (SG) 515 (AAR) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : The appellant was engaged in the wholesale and retail sales of paints and related products. He purchases paints and other hardware from manufacturers and wholesale traders. The relationship between the paint manufacturers and wholesale traders was purely principal to principal and the manufacturer/supplier provide them (a) Cash discount through credit note and (b) non-monetary benefits like Gifts, compliments, tickets for entertainment shows and trips. These non-monetary benefits are liable to TDS @10% as ‘perquisites’ under section 194R of Income Tax Act. The appellant raised tax invoice on these non-monetary considerations received by them. The AAR pronounced the following rulings: a. Whether the Tax invoice raised by them for the non-monetary benefits/perquisites is valid under GST Act b. Whether the value on which TDS deducted under section 194R of Income Tax Act should be considered as supply? And c. If the same is considered as supply, whether it is being construed as supply through any Notification or under any section of GST Act? The Advance Ruling Authority pronounced the decisions that the benefits received by the appellant is ‘consideration’ towards ‘supply of support service’ and therefore would be covered under section 7 of CGST Act, 2017. Aggrieved with the above ruling of the AAR, the appellant filed the appeal on the ground that AAR had failed to consider the Circular No. 251/08/2025-GST dated 12-09-2025 which clarifies the treatment of post-sale discounts in case of principal-principal transactions. Further contended that the perquisites are not in the course of furtherance of businesses. The appellant stated that they have not entered into any agreement with the manufacturer and dealer/end customer. RULING : The AAAR observed that the appellant in their appeal submissions and personal hearing had furnished facts which were completely different and divergent from the facts furnished at the time of original application before the AAR. As such, the AAAR was not in a position to pass an order on the Ruling passed by the AAR due to the change in facts furnished by the Applicant. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the AAR to take up the matter afresh and pass a Ruling by following the principles of natural justice. M/s. Karthik & Co., In re (2026) 130 ITPJ (SG) 514 (AAR) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : Appellants were engaged in supply of food and beverages to Corporates for distributing to staff; that the applicant neither manufactures nor prepares the food and beverages; that they have various kitchens and vendors registered with them from whom goods are picked either in individual packing or bulk packages and delivered to the client’s location; that the serving of food in the staff canteen is managed by the client; that there is no element of manufacturing or preparing or processing of foods by the applicant and the whole transaction is like an aggregator. The applicants had applied for Advance Ruling seeking a ruling on the question whether the applicant can claim input tax credit (ITC) and charge the client according to the category of supply of goods. The AAR pronounced the following rulings: a. No, the applicant cannot charge GST on the outward supply of food to the client according to the category of inward supply of goods received by them. The applicant is required to pay tax on the composite supply of service involving supply of food, at the rate of 18% (9% CGST and 9% SGST) as per Sl. No. 7(vi) of the Notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-06-2017, as amended. b. The applicant is eligible to avail ITC on the inward supply of goods/service as discussed in para 6.16 above. Aggrieved by the said ruling, the appellant filed appeal before the AAAR. RULING : The AAAR observed that as the service carried out by the Applicant does not fit into the category of services covered under Sl. Nos. 7(i) to 7(v) of Notification No. 11/2017-CT(Rate), dated 28-06-2017, the activity of supply of food undertaken by the Applicant under a contract falls under entry No.7(vi), being the residual entry, thereby attracting GST at 18% (9% CGST and 9% SGST). Hence, the ruling pronounced by the AAR in Advance Ruling No. 60/ARA/2025 dated 16-12-2025 was upheld and accordingly, the appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed. M/s. Frutta Services Private Limited, In re (2026) 130 ITPJ (SG) 513 (AAR) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : Applicant was engaged in the manufacturing of various types of process control instruments like pressure gauges, pressure transmitter, diaphragm seals, etc. Applicant has 425 numbers of employees working in their factory. The Applicant has engaged service provider who provides transportation facilities to its employees in non-air-conditioned bus on specified routes, having seating capacity of more than 13 passengers. Agreement for transport services are renewed on an annual basis. Transportation facilities have been provided to all employees who are desirous to avail for commuting to/from workplace. The Applicant recovers nominal fixed amount from its employees of Rs. 400 each per month. The service provider is a permit holder of contract carriage under Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 and rules made thereunder. Bus facility cannot be used by any person other than the employees of the Applicant and that employer-employee relation is must to avail this facility. In case, employee ceases to be in employment with Applicant, he/she is not authorized to use the said transportation facility. Similarly, applicant also provides canteen facility to its employees which are mandatory in accordance with the provisions of Factories Act, 1948 considering number of employees. The Applicant recovers nominal fixed amount from its employees of Rs. 400 each per month. The applicant sought advance ruling on the following questions: 1. Whether the passenger transport facility provided by employer to its employee, is a supply under GST, when only nominal amount is recovered form employees? 2. If answer of question no. 1 is negative, whether exemption under Sr. No. 15 clause (b) of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28th Jun 2017 is applicable to the Applicant? 3. If answer of question no. 2 is affirmative, wherever ITC is available on such service, whether it will be restricted to the extent of cost borne by the Applicant (employer)? 4. Whether canteen facility provided by employer to its employees is a supply under GST, when only nominal amount is recovered from employees? RULING : 1. Answered in the affirmative. GST is chargeable on the recovered amount. 2. The exemption under Sr. No. 15 clause (b) of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-6-2017 is not applicable to the Applicant. 3. Input Tax Credit on transportation services availed from Transport services provider is not available under section 17(5) (g) of CGST Act, 2017. 4. Answered in the affirmative & GST is chargeable on the recovered amount and ITC is not applicable. Wika Instruments India (P.) Ltd., In re (2026) 130 ITPJ (SG) 511 (AAR) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : Applicant is engaged in providing short-term and long-term credit facilities to its members and in accepting deposits from them, both being interest bearing activities. It also collects membership fees and processing charges related to its lending operations. Membership is limited to individuals who become shareholders of the Society, and only such members can avail or extend credit on a cooperative basis. The Applicant submitted that certain members who voluntarily assist in promoting the Society’s objectives are designated as “facilitators,” who help in arranging lending to other members and in encouraging collective action, savings, and investment habits. The Applicant shares certain amounts with these facilitators in connection with the activities they undertake. The applicant sought advance ruling on the following questions: (i) Whether the sharing of amounts by the Applicant to its members who act as facilitators constitutes a “supply” as defined under section 7 of the CGST Act, 2017, and accordingly attracts levy of GST under section 9 of the CGST Act, 2017 read with the Kerala State GST Act, 2017? (ii) Whether any GST is leviable on any transactions made between the Applicant and its members including those who act as facilitators? (iii) What is the classification of service if the answer to (i) and (ii) is in the affirmative? (iv) If the answer to (i) and (ii) is in affirmation, whether the GST is exempt on transactions between the Applicant and its members, including facilitators? RULING : The application for advance ruling filed by applicant was rejected as not admissible in terms of section 97(2), and section 98(2) of the CGST Act, 2017 and no ruling was issued on the questions raised in the application. Indian Co-operative Credit Society Ltd., In re (2026) 130 ITPJ (SG) 510 (AAR) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : Applicant proposed certain business activities under different hypothetical scenarios and seeks clarification regarding the applicability of GST on such activities. In the application, the Applicant had described two scenarios. In Scenario 1, the Applicant proposed to deal exclusively in exempt goods and, although not required to obtain GST registration, intends to voluntarily register under GST due to business considerations such as participation in tenders and maintaining supplier relationships. The Applicant proposes to rent commercial premises from an unregistered landlord and seeks clarification as to whether GST would be payable under Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM) in terms of Notification No. 09/2024-Central Tax (Rate) dated 8-10-2024. The Applicant further seeks clarification whether, in such a situation, the liability to pay tax would arise under section 9(3) or section 9(4) of the CGST Act, 2017. In Scenario 2, the Applicant had stated that if the answer to Scenario 1 was in the affirmative, he proposes to start a furniture manufacturing unit and opt for the composition scheme under section 10 of the CGST Act, 2017, where the primary raw material would be wood sourced from unregistered suppliers. The Applicant seeks clarification whether GST under RCM would apply on such purchases. The applicant sought advance ruling on the following questions: (i) Whether rent paid by the applicant (a voluntarily registered person dealing exclusively in exempted goods) to an unregistered landlord for commercial space is liable to GST under the Reverse Charge Mechanism? (a) If RCM applies, whether the liability arises under section 9(3) or Section 9(4) of the CGST Act, 2017? (b) If RCM does not apply, what is the legal basis for exemption? (ii) If the Applicant registers as a composition dealer for a furniture manufacturing unit, will the applicant be liable to pay GST under the RCM on purchases of wood (a key raw material) from unregistered dealers under section 9(3) or section 9(4) of the CGST Act, 2017? RULING : (i) In view of the discussions above, the application for advance ruling filed by the Applicant is not admissible under section 97 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the KSGST Act, 2017, as the questions raised do not relate to any supply of goods or services undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the Applicant. Accordingly, the application is rejected as not maintainable, without going into the merits of the issues raised. (ii) In view of the discussions above, the application for advance ruling filed by the Applicant is not admissible under section 97 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the KSGST Act, 2017, as the questions raised do not relate to any supply of goods or services undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the Applicant. Accordingly, the application is rejected as not maintainable, without going into the merits of the issues raised. M.C. Prasanth, In re (2026) 130 ITPJ (SG) 508 (AAR) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : The applicant owned and operated by an Ayurveda practitioner by profession. The Applicant was engaged in providing healthcare services in Ayurveda through its clinical establishment located in Thiruvananthapuram. The Applicant submitted that it provides both inpatient and outpatient healthcare services. A patient is treated as an inpatient upon undergoing the prescribed admission process and being allotted a room, wherein necessary medical care and treatment are provided. Patients who are not admitted are treated as outpatients and receive consultation and prescribed treatment without admission. The Applicant submits that it is presently discharging GST on all supplies made by it, including healthcare services provided in the Ayurvedic hospital. The Applicant contended that the services provided to inpatients constitute a single supply of healthcare service, wherein medicines, consumables, room rent, and other ancillary services provided during the course of treatment are integral to and inseparable from the overall healthcare service rendered in the ordinary course of business, and therefore ought not to be treated as separate taxable supplies. Accordingly, the Applicant submits that the entire bundle of services provided to inpatients assumes the character of the principal supply, i.e., healthcare services, and was therefore eligible for exemption under SI. No. 74 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-6-2017. The Applicant further contends that room rent and other charges forming part of inpatient treatment are integral components of such healthcare service and are not liable to GST, being part of the exempt supply. However, the Applicant acknowledges that medicines supplied independently to outpatients, not forming part of a bundled healthcare service, may constitute separate supplies liable to GST at the applicable rates. The applicant sought advance ruling on the following question: Whether the applicant is eligible to get the benefit of entry No.74 of exemption Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (rate dated 28-6-2017 of Government of India? RULING : The applicant is eligible to avail the benefit of exemption under Entry No. 74 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-6-2017 in respect of healthcare services provided to inpatients, including medicines, consumables, and other ancillary services that are naturally bundled with such treatment and form part of the overall healthcare service. However, the supply of medicines or other goods to outpatients, even if based on a doctor’s prescription, is not covered under the said exemption and is liable to GST at the applicable rates. Further, the exemption shall not apply to room rent (other than ICU/CCU/ICCU/NICU rooms) exceeding Rs. 5,000 per day per patient, which shall be liable to GST as per the applicable provisions. Ayushya Ayurvedic & Panchakarma Centre (Padmanabha Pillai Sambhu), In re (2026) 130 ITPJ (SG) 507 (AAR) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : The Applicant was engaged in the business of manufacturing food products like cakes, pastries, sandwiches, savories, biscuits bread etc. it sought advance ruling on the following questions: (i) Whether the sale of bakery products such as cakes, pastries, sandwiches, savouries, biscuits, slice cakes, bread, rusk and other ready-made items, which are fully manufactured at the Corlim factory and sold through bakery outlets without any cooking, preparation or processing, constitutes a supply of goods under GST? (ii) Whether preparation and sale of semi-finished goods such as pizzas at the outlets, wherein pizza base and toppings are supplied from the factory and are blended/prepared at the outlet upon customer order, constitutes restaurant service? (iii) Whether the Applicant is permitted under GST Law and basis the principles laid out in circular 164-para 3 and para 4 to 1. charge GST as goods for items sold without preparation, and 2. Charge GST as services for items involving preparation/ cooking subject to maintain a separate billing series, accounting records etc.? RULING : (i) Yes. Para 4.2 of Circular No. 164/20/2021-GST dated 6-10-2021 on this issue would also apply to all types of bakery products or for that matter any other goods which are pre-manufactured at some other premises other than the restaurant premises and are supplied without involving any service attached to it. Hence, same has to be treated as a supply of goods and as per the HSN classification of particular goods the gst rate would apply. (ii) Yes. The supply of semi-finished goods such as pizzas, pastas, salads, shakes, etc. which are cooked/prepared/made/blended at restaurant premises upon customer order, constitutes a restaurant service, irrespective of whether customer consumes them on restaurant premises or takes away. (iii) Yes. However, the taxpayer will be required to maintain separate series of tax invoices for better clarity as the taxpayer will be under legal obligation to comply with all provisions of GST Law particularly in respect of reversal of input tax credit on inward supplies of inputs and input services. This will pose a serious challenge for practical accounting purposes and best way to tackle would be to maintain separate series of tax invoices for two types of supplies. The onus to maintain clarity on this aspect would rest with the applicant taxpayer. Cremeux Bakeries (P.) Ltd., In re (2026) 130 ITPJ (SG) 500 (AAR)