Case Law Details
Case Name : In re M.U.N. Agro Industry Pvt. Ltd. (GST AAR Maharastra)
Appeal Number : No. GST-ARA-17/2018-19/B-68
Date of Judgement/Order : 16/07/2018
Related Assessment Year :
Courts :
AAR Maharashtra Advance Rulings
Become a Premium member to Download.
If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored
In re M.U.N. Agro Industry Pvt. Ltd. (GST AAR Maharastra)
Frozen meat of sheep / goat in HDPE gunny bag which do not indicate any information related to weight / number of carcass packed in such bags would tantamount to being as a product not put up in unit container and thus falls under chapt
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Sponsored
Kindly Refer to
Privacy Policy &
Complete Terms of Use and Disclaimer.
Assumptions and treatment of branded products by GST law is misguided and notions are misplaced. Producers/companies make efforts spend money to establish brand and quality. Consumer gets quality product if they buy branded product. Government starts taxing branded product or takes away exemptions from branded product where as unbranded products which does not give confidence of quality gets the benefit of lower GST or exemptions.
This is a clear cut case of discouraging businesses from producing quality products and incentivising unbranded products and putting consumers under distress and extorting higher money for quality products. It is totally baseless thinking.
Mr. Jately, Please revise the provisions by putting branded products at par with unbranded products for taxation and prove that you can think in rightful manner like an economist.