Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Goods and Services Tax

AAAR Sets Aside GST Advance Ruling as Non-Maintainable Due to Lack of Documents

Case Law Details

TaxGuru Citation
2026 taxguru.in 2782
Case Name
In re Vegan Wood Private Limited (GST AAAR Gujarat)
Appeal Number
Premium Access
Date of Judgement/Order
Premium Access
Courts
AAAR, Gujarat AAAR
Subscribe to download.

Already Upgraded? Log in.

Advertisement

In re Vegan Wood Private Limited (GST AAAR Gujarat)

The appeal was filed under section 100 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 against Advance Ruling No. GUJ/GAAR/R/2025/04 dated 21.03.2025. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of “Natural Fibre Composite Board” (NFC), commonly referred to as Rice Husk Boards, produced using agro-waste such as rice husk powder, calcium carbonate, PVC resin, recycling waste, and processing aids including thermo-coupling agents and lubricants. PVC is used solely as a binding agent, and the finished product simulates characteristics similar to wood-based particle boards. The appellant claimed classification under CTH 441193 and sought a ruling on whether the product would remain classified under Chapter 44 as wood and articles of wood and attract 12% GST.

The Gujarat Authority for Advance Ruling examined research conducted by the Indian Plywood Industries Research Institute (IPIRI), Bangalore, on the development of particle boards using lignocellulosic agricultural residue such as rice husk. It referred to BIS standards covering high, medium, and low-density particle boards and their permissible materials. The Authority noted that the test report dated 23.12.2024 submitted by the appellant confirmed the contents of the rice husk board, but remarked that the contents resembled those in a previous ruling in another case. It also observed that the test report mentioned that the parameters were not covered or accredited under NABL scope of accreditation and did not state that BIS standards were followed. The Authority stated that the applicant should have provided a test report from a government-recognised laboratory as listed in CBIC Circular No. 43/2017-Customs dated 16.11.2017. It further observed that the applicant did not provide brochures, purchase invoices of inputs, or sales invoices. On account of lack of adequate details, the Authority held the application to be non-maintainable.

Want to Read the Complete Judgment?

You have read the free case summary. Unlock the full judgment, the detailed judicial reasoning and the downloadable PDF, along with every other premium judgment on TaxGuru.

Read on with Premium
Goes straight to payment. GST invoice included.

One subscription covers the entire premium judgment library, not just this case.

Advertisement

Author Info

CA Sandeep Kanoi
Qualification: Graduate, CA in Job / Business, DD
Company: Taxguru Consultancy
Location: Mumbai, Maharashtra
Articles Published: 24,181

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.