Printing to be considered as supply of goods or services?

Pradeep Jain | Last updated: 07 December 2020

Save Share

Quick Summary

The printing industry faces confusion regarding whether printing services constitute a supply of goods or services for GST purposes. Advance rulings from different states have reached opposing conclusions on similar cases involving the supply of printed trade advertisement materials. This divergence creates compliance challenges for businesses operating across multiple states, highlighting the need for a centralised appellate authority to ensure consistent tax treatment.

Printing Industry is a very wide Industry ranging from Newspapers to Commercial Books and Periodicals. The present update seeks to discuss about the divergent advance rulings pronounced by different AARs in the case of same assessee, M/s Macro Digital Imaging Pvt Ltd. where the applicant is register

Daily Limit Reached

You have reached your daily limit of 2 Free Articles

Subscribe to CCI PRO for unlimited access

Why Upgrade to CCI PRO?

No Ads
WhatsApp Broadcasts
Daily E-Newsletter
Unlimited Articles Access

BEST VALUE

2 YEAR PLAN

3,499

(Inclusive of GST)

1 YEAR PLAN

1,999

(Inclusive of GST)

View all CCI PRO benfits

Already a PRO member? Login here for an ad-free experience.

FAQ :

The article discusses the conflicting advance rulings on whether the supply of printed materials, such as trade advertisements, should be classified as a supply of goods or services for GST purposes.

The Telangana Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) held that supplying printed advertisement material, where the customer provides specifications and designs, is a supply of goods under HSN 4911, liable to 12% GST.

In West Bengal, the AAR ruled that the activity was a service of printing, falling under SAC 9989. This decision was upheld by the appellate authority, which found the service portion to be predominant.

These divergent rulings create compliance challenges for taxpayers with multi-locational operations, as they may have to follow different tax treatments for the same transaction in different states, contradicting the 'One Nation One Tax' principle.

The article suggests the urgent need for a centralised appellate authority for advance rulings to handle cases with conflicting decisions from different AARs, aiming for consistency and a more taxpayer-friendly mechanism.