GTA Services Exempt if Recipient is Unregistered | AAR

Case Details: Flipkart India (P.) Ltd., In re - [2026] 184 taxmann.com 53 (AAR-TAMILNADU)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• C. Thiyagarajan & B. Suseel Kumar, Member

Facts of the Case

The applicant proposed to transport goods by road for customers placing orders through electronic commerce operator (ECO) portals. Under the proposed model, sellers hand over goods at a Source Mother Hub, which issues a single consignment note for delivery to the end customer. It retains lien and custody of goods, assumes responsibility for safe delivery, and maintains transit insurance until delivery, while transportation is executed either through its own network or third-party carriers. The end customer is responsible for the transport charges. An advance ruling was sought on whether such activity qualifies as Goods Transport Agency (GTA) services. The matter was accordingly placed before the Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR).

AAR Held

The AAR held that the essential characteristic of a GTA service is the issuance of a consignment note evidencing receipt of goods, transfer of custody, and assumption of responsibility for delivery. It was observed that the applicant satisfies all conditions as it transports goods by road and issues a consignment note while retaining custody and liability till delivery, thereby qualifying as a ‘supply’ under Section 7 of the CGST Act and the Tamil Nadu GST Act. It was held that exemption under Section 11 of the CGST Act and the Tamil Nadu GST Act is applicable to GTA services provided to an unregistered person. It was clarified that customers ordering through ECO portals who are not registered under GST would fall within the scope of the exemption. Consequently, GTA services supplied by the applicant to such unregistered recipients were held to be exempt from GST.

List of Cases Referred to

• Mangalore Chemicals and Fertilisers Limited v. Deputy CCTes 1992 Supp (1) SCC 21 (para 3.10)
• Union of India v. Wood Papers Ltd. (1990) 4 SCC 256 (para 3.20)
• Saravana Perumal, In re [2020] 113 taxmann.com 288 (AAR – KARNATAKA)/[2020] 78 GST 275 (AAR – KARNATAKA)/[2020] 33 GSTL 39 (AAR – KARNATAKA) (para 3.23)
• CCE v. JWC Logistics Pvt. Ltd. 2019 (22) GSTL 237 (Tri-Mum) (para 3.8).