Case Details: Stark Photo Book vs. Assistant Commissioner (Intelligence) (2025) 35 Centax 121 (Ker.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Ziyad Rahman A.A., J.
- S/Shri R. Sreejith, Smt. K. Krishna, Achyuth Menon, Padmanathan K.V. & Smt. Meera V. Menon, Advs. for the Petitioner.
- Smt. Reshmitha R. Chandran, Sr. G.P., for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioners, partnership firms engaged in printing photographs, photo books, and similar items, challenged the classification of their services under GST. Customers supplied digital content via CD, pen drive, or HDD, and the petitioners supplied paper, ink, and delivered the printed output. The petitioners had classified the supply under HSN 4911 and paid tax at 12%. Proceedings under Section 74 alleged that the activity amounted to a supply of printing services under SAC 998386, taxable at 18%. The petitioners contended that, relying on FAQs, circulars, and previous AARs, the supply should continue to be classified under HSN 4911 at 12%. They submitted that they only provided printing on customer-supplied content, which did not change the nature of the supply. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court held that the petitioners’ activity amounts to a composite supply under Section 2(30) of the CGST Act, with the principal supply being printing services. The Court observed that customers retained title in the content and photographs, while the paper and ink supplied by the petitioners were ancillary to the service per Section 2(90) read with Section 8. The printing of photographs, including from digital media, falls under SAC 998386 and is taxable at 18%. The Court dismissed the writ petitions, noting that the activity cannot be classified under HSN 4911 at 12%. It was further held that limitation during the pendency of proceedings is excluded as per the statutory provisions. Liberty was granted to the petitioners to pursue statutory remedies. The writ petitions were disposed of.
