GST rate for Sanitary Napkins-Government clarification
Ministry of Finance
Press Release
Dated: 10th July 2017
There are some remarks made by various column writers on GST rate on sanitary napkins. It may be mentioned that the tax incidence on this item before and after GST is the same or less.
Sanitary napkins are classifiable under heading 9619. In pre-GST, they attracted concessional excise duty of 6% and 5% VAT and, the pre-GST estimated total tax incidence on sanitary napkins was 13.68%. Therefore, 12% GST rate had been provided for sanitary napkin.
Major raw materials for manufacture of sanitary napkins and applicable GST rates on them are as under:
(a) 18% GST rate
o Super Absorbent Polymer
o Poly Ethylene Film
o Glue
o LLDPE– Packing Cover
(b) 12% GST rate
o Thermo Bonded Non-woven
o Release Paper
o Wood Pulp
As raw materials for manufacture of sanitary napkins attract GST of 18% of 12%, even with 12% GST on sanitary napkins, there in an inversion in the GST structure. Though, within the existing GST law such accumulated ITC will be refunded, it will have associated financial costs [interest burden] and administrative cost, putting them at a dis-advantage vis-à-vis imports, which will also attract 12% IGST on their imports, with no additional financial costs on account of fund blockage and associated administrative cost of refunds.
If the GST rate on sanitary napkins were to be reduced from 12% to 5%, it will further accentuate the tax inversion and result in even higher accumulated ITC, with correspondingly higher finical costs on account of fund blockage and associated administrative cost of refunds, putting domestic manufacturers at even greater dis-advantage vis-à-vis imports.
Reducing the GST rate on sanitary napkins to Nil, will however, result in complete denial of ITC to domestic manufacturers of sanitary napkins and zero rating imports. This will make domestically manufactured sanitary napkins at a huge dis-advantage vis-à-vis imports, which will be zero rated.
*****
DSM/SS/KA
(Release ID :167293)
Agreement validly terminated prior to initiation of CIRP did not constitute “assets” or “property” of the corporate debtor u/s 14…
Supreme Court explains jurisdiction of courts under NI Act for dishonour of account payee or bearer cheques In a recent…
Advances received in normal course of business and adjusted against sale bills cannot be added u/s 68 of the Income…
Faceless mechanism for income escaping assessment would not exclude the Central charges and International Taxation charges from its application -…
Ground not adjudicated by first appellate authority or ground not originating from first appellate order cannot be decided in second…
High Court directed ITD to consider condonation of delay in filing ITR for four years as the COVID-19 pandemic constituted…