Page 115 - GSTL_14th May 2020_Vol 36_Part 2

2020 ] GUJARAT CO-OP. MILK MARKETING FEDERATION LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA 217
or plastic pouches and the like, is also chargeable to nil rate of tax by virtue of
Serial No. 24 of the above notification. It was argued that considering the scope
of exemption under Serial No. 24 of the Table to Notification No. 11/2017, dated
28-6-2017, milk chilling services and also packing of milk are fully exempt from
payment of GST and, therefore, no CGST is chargeable from the petitioners’ con-
tractors or any other person providing such services in relation to milk.
15.3 The Learned Advocate further submitted that the clarification is-
sued by the TRU is incorrect and erroneous, inasmuch as this clarification is ap-
parently based on a misconception about the scheme of exemption contained at
Serial No. 24 of Notification No. 11/2017, dated 28-6-2017. It was submitted that
the impugned TRU clarification proceeds on the basis that chilled and packed
milk for retail sale was not covered by the definition of “agricultural produce” as
according to the TRU, the processes of chilling and retail packing of milk were
usually not done by a cultivator or a producer. It was contended that this may be
true, but that would only mean that chilled and packed milk was not “agricul-
tural produce”; whereas the question involved in this case is not whether chilled
and packed milk was “agricultural produce” or not. The question is whether or-
dinary milk (that is, before it is chilled and packed milk) is “agricultural pro-
duce” or not, because the “support services” in the nature of chilling and packing
have been provided by third parties for such ordinary milk. It was submitted
that unfortunately, this position has not been addressed by the TRU, and the im-
pugned clarification is given as if exemption of “support services” was claimed
for chilled and packed milk; although, admittedly, the exemption is claimed for
ordinary milk, and the exemption is claimed for “support services” in the nature
of chilling (that is storage) and packing. It was accordingly, urged that the peti-
tion deserves to be allowed in terms of the reliefs prayed for in the petition.
16. Mr. Viral K. Shah, Learned Senior Standing Counsel for the re-
spondents, reiterated the averments made in the affidavit-in-reply as referred to
hereinabove. It was submitted that the services availed of by the contractors, are
clearly not support services for agricultural produce and hence, vide the com-
munication dated 9-8-2018, the respondents have rightly stated that chilling and
packing of milk is not exempt from GST.
17. From the facts and contentions noted herein above, it appears that it
is not in dispute that milk is an agricultural produce, it being a produce out of
rearing of life forms of animals and for food. The present case relates to raw and
unprocessed milk. What is brought to the centres is raw milk in which no further
processing has been done and therefore, such milk is an agricultural produce.
18. The chilling and packing services provided by the contractors to the
petitioners are in respect of raw milk. As farmers involved in rearing animals for
the purpose of milk cannot directly connect to each of the consumers of the sup-
ply of milk, such farmers join hands to form a village co-operative society and
supply milk to the member unions.
19. Vide Notification No. 11/2017, dated 28th June, 2017, services fall-
ing under Heading 9986 were exempted from payment of tax under Central
Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, State Goods and Services Tax Acts, 2017,
Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Integrated Goods and
Services Tax Act, 2017. The services falling under clause (i) of the Heading 9986

GST LAW TIMES  14th May 2020  115