Gujarat AAR on Castor Oil: Classification and Implications on Refund under Inverted Duty Structure:

GST advance ruling on non-edible castor oil, confirms its classification under HSN 1518 with 5% IGST and addressing refund-related queries under the inverted duty structure.
Gujarat AAR Confirms 5% GST Under HSN 1518

Gujarat AAR on Castor Oil: Classification and Implications on Refund under Inverted Duty Structure
The present advance ruling (No. GUJ/GAAR/R/2025/30) dated August 12, 2025, has been filed by a company named M/s. Vinayak Agro Industries (Applicant) under Section 91(2) of the CGST / GGST Act, 2017. The company has a registered address at Plot No. 1053/1, Chhatral Kadi Road, Chhatral, Gandhinagar, Gujarat-382279, with GSTIN: 24AAVFV6787GIZA. The applicant is involved in the manufacture of castor oil.
Questions Asked by Appellant:
The appellant, M/s Vinayak Agro Industries, has asked the following questions, seeking the Gujarat Advance Ruling No. GUJ/GAAR/R/2025/30, dated August 12, 2025:
"Question 1. Whether the chapter heading selected for output, i.e., Castor oil [non-edible], is correctly considered under chapter heading 15 at the rate of IGST @ 5%?"
Question 2. Whether the assessee is eligible for the refund of accumulated GST considering the inverted rate structure, considering the notification No. 9/2022-CT(R) dated 13.7.22 & Sr. No. 2 of circular No. 181/13/2022-GST dated 10.11.2022?
Question 3. If a refund of accumulated GST is not allowed, then how can the assessee utilise the accumulated GST due to the inverted rate structure?"
What Did the Ruling Say?
In accordance with the Gujarat Authority for Advance Ruling Goods And Services Tax D/5, Rajya Kar Bhavan, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380009, the following answers have been given to the above questions:
Answer 1: The output produced by M/s. Vinayak Agro Industries, i.e., Castor Oil [non-edible], is classifiable under 11SN 1518 and is subject to IGST at 5% in terms of serial no. 90 of schedule I of notification No. 1/2017-11 (Rate), dated 28.6.2017, as amended.
Answers 2 and 3: The advance ruling did not answer the second and third questions, as they have already explained the conclusions above in the ruling.
About Author

Saloni Kumari
Content Writer
Saloni is a Content Writer with 2+ years of experience at studycafe.in. She writes legal, taxation, and finance related content including GST, Income Tax etc. Skilled in translating complex judicial pronouncements and regulatory developments into clear, and reader-friendly articles. Experienced in covering judgements of ITAT, High Court, GSTAT, and news related to Income Tax, GST, and corporate law. She can be reached at [email protected].
StudyCafe
Delhi, Delhi, India
2389My Recent Articles
- ITAT Remands Section 69 Unexplained Cash Credit Addition After Bank Statement Was Not ExaminedPremium
- ITAT Remands Transfer Pricing Dispute: DRP to Reassess Comparables and Working Capital AdjustmentPremium
- CBDT Notifies TDS Exemption on Aircraft Lease Payments to IFSC Units Under 20-Year Tax Deduction Scheme Premium
- CBDT Grants TDS Exemption On Ship Leasing Payments To IFSC Units Under 20-Year Tax Deduction SchemePremium
- ITAT Remands Case to CIT(A) After Admitting Crucial Sale Deed as Additional Evidence
Up Next
Loading suggestions…
Recent Posts

All Posts

Tags
No tags yet.
Recent Posts

All Posts

Tags
No tags yet.







