No GST on Processed Seafood in ‘Industrial Packs- Not For Retail Sale’, 5% GST Applies Otherwise: AAR [Read Order]

The bench noted that while the revenue authorities opined that the supply could be exempt, the absence of supporting evidence from the applicant made it impossible to determine whether the conditions for exemption were met
AAR West Bengal - Seafood - GST -Taxscan

The West Bengal Authority of Advance Ruling ( AAR ) has ruled that Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) is not applicable on supply of processed seafood in ‘Industrial Packs – Not For Retail Sale’. However, the authority has refrained from pronouncing a ruling citing the need for documentary evidence.

The applicant, Sravanti Lahiri intending to supply frozen seafood such as prawns and fish to industrial units for consumption, sought clarification on whether such supplies are exempt from GST under relevant notifications and legal provisions.

GST Ruling – A Verdict That Changes Everything –Click Here

The applicant argued that the supply of frozen seafood to industrial or institutional customers falls under Rule 2(b) of the Legal Metrology (Packed Commodities) Rules, 2011, and is not considered “pre-packaged and labeled” as per Notification 01/2017 Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017. Referring to Notification No. 7/2022-CTR dated 13.07.2022 and the CBIC’s FAQ issued on 17.07.2022, the applicant claimed that such supplies are exempt from GST.

In response, the revenue authorities stated that under Rule 3(c) of the Legal Metrology (Packed Commodities) Rules, 2011, packaged commodities supplied for industrial or institutional consumption are excluded from GST if they meet the specified conditions. However, if the supply does not fulfill these conditions, it would attract a 5% GST rate.

GST Ruling – A Verdict That Changes Everything –Click Here

The applicant was given multiple opportunities for a personal hearing on 11.12.2024, 14.01.2025, and 18.02.2025 but failed to appear or submit supporting documents. As a result, the AAR proceeded to dispose of the application ex parte.

The AAR bench of Dr. Tanisha Dutta and Joyjit Banik noted that while the revenue authorities opined that the supply could be exempt, the absence of supporting evidence from the applicant made it impossible to determine whether the conditions for exemption were met. Consequently, the AAR refrained from issuing a ruling on the matter.

Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates

taxscan-loader