The Authority held that electricity transferred to the DISCOM grid constituted a supply under GST. Since electricity attracted a nil rate of tax, ITC on solar plant-related expenses was denied.
Uttarakhand AAR held that services relating to municipal water supply functions qualified for GST exemption under Notification No. 12/2017. The ruling clarifies how Article 243W functions influence tax treatment.
The Authority held that retrospective insertion of Section 16(5) does not permit reclaim of ITC already reversed under earlier rulings. It clarified that the amendment only overrides Section 16(4) and does not dilute other eligibility conditions under Section 16.
CAAR declined to entertain an advance ruling application on roasted areca nut classification after finding that the issue had already been decided by the Madras High Court. The Authority held that judicial precedent barred re-examination of the same question.
Karnataka AAR disposed of the application after the applicant informed that GST demand orders on the same issue were already under appellate consideration. No ruling was given on the merits.
Karnataka AAR disposed of the application after observing that a request for extension of the ITC availment deadline did not fall within matters covered under Section 97(2) of the CGST Act.
The authority clarified that ITC cannot be claimed on amounts recovered from employees toward canteen facilities. Credit is restricted to the expenditure actually incurred by the employer.
The Gujarat AAR held that Psyllium (Isabgol) Seeds procured from farmers and supplied without drying, freezing, or processing qualify as fresh seeds. As a result, they are exempt from GST under Entry 87 of Notification No. 10/2025.
The Rajasthan GST AAAR held that advance ruling authorities cannot determine whether bags are biodegradable or compostable. It ruled that concessional 5% GST applies only if biodegradability is established by competent authorities.
The Kerala AAAR held that various packaged curries, rice products, and meat-based preparations are classifiable under HSN 21069099. The ruling emphasized that the classification must be based on the nature of the final ready-to-eat product rather than individual ingredients.
