An 18% GST shall be levied on the Rapigro, The Ahmedabad Bench of the Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) stated.
‘Rapigro’ would be categorized as a Plant Growth Regulator and not a fertilizer, the bench of Amit Kumar Mishra and Milind Kavatkar witnessed.
The petitioner, M/s. Isagro has the business of manufacturing the product Rapigro and was categorizing the same beneath TI 3507 of CETA ’85 as a fertilizer. But the Central Excise authorities categorized the same beneath TI 38089340 as a ‘plant growth regulator’.
On the categorization of the Rapigro under the Customs Tariff Act, of 1975, and under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, of 2017 the petitioner seeks an advanced ruling.
The dispute was concerned that if the product would be the fertilizer as the petitioner claimed or a plant growth regulator.
The petitioner argued, they applied and then provided the product registration as a ‘biostimulant, and being a bio-stimulant, it dropped within the definition of fertilizer.
Read Also: GST Impact on Agriculture Sector in India
AAR observed, there would be merely a fine of the differences between the fertilizer and the plant growth regulator. But the fertilizer would be utilised for advancing the plants or crops’ growth for the required surged harvest, plant growth regulators work on particular areas, which consequences in an altered rise or decrease of the particular growth.
| Applicant Name | Jivagro Limited |
| GSTIN of the applicant | 24AAECI7l19AIZI |
| Date | 30.06.2023 |
| Applicant | Ms. Sonia Gupta, Advocate, Shri Ashok Dhingra, Advocate |
| Ahmedabad GST AAR | Read Order |
