• The applicant engaged in the business of reselling ice-creams in wholesale as well as retail sale packages. The applicant purchased the ice cream from its sole manufacturer, KOIPL (The franchisor). The applicant exclusively dealt in the ice-cream manufactured by the franchisor. The applicant sold the ice-creams to its customers “as it is” without any further processing/alteration/structural or chemical change.

• The applicant filed an instant application to sought an advance ruling in respect of the question that whether supply of ice-cream by the applicant from its retail outlets would be treated as supply of “goods” or supply of “service” or a “composite supply” and; whether the supply, not being a composite supply, would be treated as supply of service in terms of entry 6(b) of Schedule 11 attached to the CGST Act, 2017 and leviable to CGST @ 2.5% in terms of Notification No. 11/2017 as amended by Notification No.46/2017-Central Tax (Rate) (serial no. (i) entry no. 7) of the notification.

• In the subject case there is a transfer of title in ice creams from the applicant to their customers and, therefore, as per entry no. 1(a) of the Schedule II of the CGST Act, the subject transaction is nothing but a supply of goods.

• Thus, the supply of ice-cream by the applicant from its retail outlets would be treated as supply of ‘goods’.

[2019] 104 taxmann.com 230 (AAR – MAHARASHTRA)

AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, MAHARASHTRA

Arihant Enterprises, In re

B. TIMOTHY AND B.V. BORHADE, MEMBER

NO. GST/ARA/126/2018-19/B-29

MARCH  19, 2019

R