Article Section | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Home Articles Goods and Services Tax - GST ADITYA SINHAL Experts This |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Agricultural Produce under GST Law and services associated with it |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Discuss this article |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Agricultural Produce under GST Law and services associated with it |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The term “Agricultural produce” (कृषि उपज) is required to be interpreted in the context of GST law because various supplies pertaining to agricultural produce are given exemption from the levy of GST and there has always been an ambiguity for goods falling into the category of agricultural produce or not, which is warranted by the need of numerous advance rulings and Judicial pronouncements on the subject matter. Navigating the GST landscape requires diligence and in this very article, I will try to delve deep and decode the meaning of “Agricultural produce” taking into account the notifications, advance rulings, and court orders concerning the same. LEGAL FRAMEWORK In common parlance, goods such as:- Grains/cereals (maize, rice, wheat, barley, corn, sorghum, millet, lentil, etc), Spices (cumin, coriander, turmeric, fennel, cardamom, fenugreek, poppy, carom etc), Oil seeds (soyabean, groundnut, flaxseeds, sesame, mustard, etc), Herbs (psyllium, basil, chia, ashwagandha, chirayata etc) are all considered “Agricultural produce” and their trade at the initial level, is usually regularised by the Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC), which is a marketing board established by state governments in India. Under GST law, the term “Agricultural produce” is first mentioned and defined under Notification number 11/2017 - Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-06-2017 which notifies the rate of levy of Central Tax as “Nil” on:-
In addition to Heading 9986, the term has also been mentioned in the Notification Number 12/2017 – Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-06-2017 which exempts levy of Central Tax on:-
Note:- Heading 9986 as mentioned in notification number 11/2017 CT Rate, has again been reproduced at serial number 54 in notification number 12/2017 CT Rate making such services as exempt. As per the two notifications above, it can be categorically said that in the context of agricultural produce, there are broadly two heads of services namely:-
After finding out the nature and category of services associated with agricultural produce which are not subject to GST, it is crucial to understand the meaning under the law where the actual ambiguity (as mentioned at the beginning of the article, and the sole purpose of writing it) lies:- The meaning of “Agricultural Produce” for the above-mentioned notifications is given in the explanation as:- “agricultural produce” means any produce out of cultivation of plants and rearing of all life forms of animals, except the rearing of horses, for food, fibre, fuel, raw material or other similar products, on which –
In this regard, a circular has also been issued numbered 16/16/2017-GST dated 15/11/2017, in which at serial number 1 it has been clarified that:-
The definition required to be analysed from different aspects, let’s take up each one by one:- QUALIFYING POINTS
Who’s carrying out the processing is not important, what’s crucial here is the fact that such a process shall be of such extent that the goods still retain essential characterstics.
For example, if processing work like cleaning, grading, sorting etc is being carried out at the trader's premises would also keep the goods under the said category, unless any special machines are deployed for same.
In general understanding, the APMCs are considered as the primary market, because it is the first point of trade of such agricultural goods between cultivators and traders. Once the ownership gets transferred to traders, the goods might (or might not) undergo further processing and get ready to be further sold in the secondary market. It shall hence be of utmost importance that the process carried out upon the goods shall be only of such nature that it makes the produce capable enough to be marketed at APMC level, and not beyond that. Rather than being marketed in the primary market, the important aspect is the marketability of ‘produce’ to get marketed in the primary market. Although the above-mentioned points are a very subjective criterion to ascertain the category of particular goods, let us refer to the rulings on the subject to understand it better. JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS
the notification about warehousing of agricultural produce is service-specific and not person-specific. Hence the entry for exemption is equally applicable for agricultural produce of both the farmer as well as the trader.
“… the notification is with regard to service supplied and not person specific. As such, the entry No. 54(e) is equally applicable for storage services in respect of agricultural produce of both the farmers and the traders.” *It can be easily concluded from the above 2 rulings, that the ownership of goods is immaterial for the qualification of agricultural produce.*
“we find that the process of cleaning does not alter the essential characterstics of agricultural produce,……… but there is a vast difference between the type of cleaning undertaken at the farm level by the farmer and undertaken at the factory by specialized machines.” It can thus be clearly understood that merely a process which doesn’t alter essential characterstics would not suffice but it shall also not be carried by specialized machines (which are usually not used at the farm level) for goods to qualify as “Agricultural produce”
“various processes, such as, boiling, drying and polishing of fresh harvested turmeric are carried out by farmers in their farms to make the turmeric marketable, it is established beyond any doubt that the post-harvesting processes are carried out by the farmers or producers themselves on their farm. On perusal of the said Test Reports, it is observed that there is no difference between the essential characteristics of the raw turmeric and the dried turmeric as oil content and the curcuminoid content are invariably present in both the samples, though in different concentration. The said difference in the concentration of both the components in both the samples, i.e., raw turmeric and dried turmeric, is attributable to the drying of the fresh/raw turmeric having greater content of moisture, which eventually gets removed upon drying during post-harvesting operation to render higher concentration of the aforesaid components in the dried turmeric. Since, the term primary market is not defined under GST law, we would like to refer to the letter dated 01.02.2022, issued by APMC, Basmathnagar, Distt.-Hingoli (Maharashtra), wherein it has inter-alia been declared that “The APMC market across the state of Maharashtra act as primary or wholesale market for sale of agricultural produce by the farmers where the Traders/wholesalers make the purchase of such agricultural produce, by following laid down procedure. Thus, attributable to the said APMC letter, it can be aptly concluded that the APMC market, where the impugned product is sold by the farmers, is nothing but primary market.
“The term 'primary market' has not been defined in the GST Act. However, on the basis of location or place of operation, such markets in relation to agricultural produce are located in towns near the centres of production of agricultural commodities. In these markets, a major part of the produce is brought for sale by the producer-farmers themselves. Transactions in these markets usually take place between the farmers and primary traders. [Source: ‘Agricultural Marketing: Concept and Definition’ from the website of Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya] “Circular No. 16/16/2017-GST dated 15/11/2017 issued by CBIC clarifies that pulses (de-husked or split) are not considered as agricultural produce since the process of de-husking or splitting of pulses is usually not carried out by farmers or at farm level but by the pulse millers. It therefore appears that for the purpose of agricultural produce, the processes and services that are applied till the goods are at the farmer's hand to make it marketable for primary market is to be considered. Any services supplied for loading and unloading as supplied by the applicant after the goods left the primary market do not qualify for exemption under serial number 54 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017.
The term primary market in common parlance refers to farmers market like “mandi” or “arhat” being a place where the farmers directly sell their product to the buyers like wholesalers. millers. food processing units, etc. The spirit of the legislature was intended to boost the agricultural sector of the home country and not that of a foreign land. The primary market in the instant case being located in foreign shores does not conform to the definition (of agricultural produce) as stated above.
An advance ruling was sought before approaching the high court, which ruled that the support services mentioned above are not exempt, on the ground that “the imported wheat with regard to which the services were rendered was not meant for the primary market but instead meant / intended to be used by the petitioner at its factory for further processing of the wheat imported into atta, maida and sooji.” The petitioner approached the high court, wherein multiple observations were made:- “9.1 …….. the mere fact that the buyer of “agricultural produce” intended to subject it to various other processes subsequently resulting in conversion of wheat into maida, atta and sooji would not take the services of loading, unloading, packing, storage and warehousing of the “agricultural produce” out of Serial No. 54(e) of the Exemption Notification. The reasoning in the impugned order of the 1st Respondent results in importing a condition as to the use to which the agricultural produce would be subject to in the hands of the service recipient. “9.3 The construction of the Notification in the impugned order of the 1st Respondent results in converting the expression "marketable" employed in the definition of “agricultural produce” into "marketed", which is impermissible. This would be even more evident if we keep in mind the expression "marketable" has been construed and explained by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on more than one occasion to mean that it is only required to be shown that it is capable of being marketed and not actually marketed. Applying the above reasoning to the term “marketable” used in the definition of “agricultural produce” it would be clear that it only means that the goods in question in the instant case wheat must be capable of being marketed in the primary market and it is not necessary to show that it is actually marketed. Hence, it can be easily concluded from the above judgement of the Madras High Court that, firstly the intended use of goods is not important rather the goods in hand shall be put to test for it to qualify as Agricultural produce. Secondly, the expression marketable shall not be used as marketed, meaning thereby the goods should be capable of being marketed not necessarily marketed in the primary market, for their qualification under agricultural produce. SUGGESTION CBIC shall come up with further clarifications and standard procedures to be adopted by the person engaged in the provision of support services such as warehousing/storage/handling/packaging etc and transportation of agricultural produce, for them to ascertain whether said service is leviable to GST or exempt because as already discussed above it is not ownership specific to the goods (Trader-Cultivator) and it's challenging (or rather impractical) for the service provider to find out if the goods in their custody:-
By: ADITYA SINHAL - April 9, 2024
Discussions to this article
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Discuss this article |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||