<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2018 (9) TMI 1258 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, TAMILNADU</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367522</link>
    <description>A commission agent facilitating the sale and purchase of turmeric agricultural produce in a regulated primary market, including storage, weighment and remittance of sale proceeds, was treated as providing services on behalf of the agriculturist. Applying the statutory definition of commission agent and the exemption for support services to agriculture under Notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate), the activity was held to fall within the exempt category. The commission structure and bye-laws showed that the charges covered incidental marketing services connected with agricultural produce, so the supply was not taxable and attracted NIL CGST and SGST.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2025 10:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=535285" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 1258 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, TAMILNADU</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367522</link>
      <description>A commission agent facilitating the sale and purchase of turmeric agricultural produce in a regulated primary market, including storage, weighment and remittance of sale proceeds, was treated as providing services on behalf of the agriculturist. Applying the statutory definition of commission agent and the exemption for support services to agriculture under Notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate), the activity was held to fall within the exempt category. The commission structure and bye-laws showed that the charges covered incidental marketing services connected with agricultural produce, so the supply was not taxable and attracted NIL CGST and SGST.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367522</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>