GST Update | GSTN Advisory 667 FAQs | Current Status: On Hold

GSTN Advisory 667 FAQs: Ship-to GSTIN and e-Way Bill Closure - Later Put on Hold

On 2 July 2026, GSTN published Advisory No. 667 with detailed FAQs on the proposed mandatory capture of Ship-to field / Ship-to GSTIN and the proposed voluntary closure of e-Way Bills.

The FAQs clarified stakeholder questions on business scenarios and API behaviour. However, GSTN Advisory 668 dated 29 July 2026 later kept these proposed enhancements on hold until further notice. The earlier 1 August 2026 implementation date is therefore not a current production deadline.

Why this advisory is important

GSTN Advisory 661 introduced the broad proposed changes in the e-Way Bill system. Advisory 667 goes deeper and answers practical stakeholder questions through two detailed FAQ documents.

For businesses, transporters, ERP/API users, GST professionals and CAs, this advisory is important because it explains how the changes may work in real business situations such as Bill-to/Ship-to transactions, export-linked movements, e-Invoice flows and e-Way Bill Closure after delivery.

Ship-to GSTIN rules proposed for August 2026 (currently on hold)

The FAQ published on 2 July 2026 stated that, under the proposed implementation, Ship-to GSTIN would be captured as a mandatory data element in Bill-to/Ship-to and Combination transactions wherever the Ship-to party is registered.

The same FAQ stated that where GSTIN was not available, “URP” could be entered wherever applicable and that “URP” is not case-sensitive. These points are retained here only as historical proposal detail while the implementation remains on hold.

Transaction Matrix: When is Ship-to GSTIN required?

The FAQ document explains different transaction types. This matrix gives a quick practical view for taxpayers, GST professionals and ERP/API users.

Important clarification: Bill-to GSTIN and Ship-to GSTIN should not be the same

The FAQ clarifies that in a Bill-to/Ship-to transaction, the Bill-to party and Ship-to party are expected to be distinct persons. Therefore, the same GSTIN as mentioned in the Bill-to field should not be entered in the Ship-to GSTIN field.

Quick decision logic for businesses and GST teams

Confidentiality of Ship-to GSTIN

One important concern raised by stakeholders was trade secrecy. The FAQ clarifies that Ship-to GSTIN will not be printed on the e-Way Bill generated on the e-Way Bill portal.

It also clarifies that Ship-to GSTIN will not be provided through GET e-Way Bill APIs. The relevant Ship-to address and PIN code will continue to be visible as per the existing practice.

URP in e-Way Bill export transactions

The FAQs also clarify export-related situations. In export transactions, goods may be billed to an overseas buyer but physically moved from the supplier’s premises in India to a port, airport, ICD, CFS, customs area, freight forwarder location, CHA-nominated premises or another export-linked location.

In export sub-supply type involving Bill-to/Ship-to transactions, Ship-to GSTIN is proposed to be entered as URP where the Ship-to location is export-linked and no domestic registered Ship-to GSTIN is applicable.

Bill-to Ship-to e-Way Bill error codes for ERP/API users

The FAQ provides detailed clarifications for ERP vendors, GSPs, ASPs, IRPs and system integrators. These system validation codes are useful for sandbox testing and API readiness.

API, e-Invoice and e-Way Bill by IRN impact

Voluntary e-Way Bill Closure: Key clarification

The second FAQ document described a proposed voluntary e-Way Bill Closure facility for recording completion of movement after delivery. GSTN later placed the proposed enhancement on hold until further notice.

The FAQ had described e-Way Bill Closure as voluntary and had referred to 1 August 2026 as the revised implementation date. GSTN Advisory 668 later superseded that timeline by placing the proposed enhancements on hold until further notice.

What did the withdrawn FAQ say about closure timing?

Under the proposed facility described in the FAQ, an e-Way Bill was to be closed after completion of delivery, on the date of delivery or on the immediately succeeding day.

The FAQ also described a system validation under which the proposed closure functionality could remain available up to one day after expiry of the e-Way Bill validity. This is historical proposal detail, not a current production requirement.

Who did the proposed closure facility allow to close an e-Way Bill?

The FAQ described the proposed facility as allowing closure by the supplier, recipient, transporter involved in the transaction, or a driver / authorised person whose mobile number had been provided for closure.

e-Way Bill closure API limitations

The FAQ described an API for system integrators and API users under the proposed closure facility, using the e-Way Bill number, closure date and remarks, with remarks up to 100 characters. These API details are retained as historical technical reference while the proposal remains on hold.

Status and post-closure behaviour

The FAQ stated that a separate status of “Closed” was proposed to be introduced in due course for e-Way Bills that have been marked as closed after completion of delivery.

For the proposed initial stabilisation period, the FAQ described continuation of the existing Active, Cancelled or Discarded status framework, with closure details captured without necessarily showing a separate Closed status immediately.

Closure is not cancellation or expiry

What businesses should do while implementation is on hold

GSTN has put the proposed enhancements on hold until further notice. Businesses should not treat the earlier 1 August 2026 date as an active implementation deadline. The earlier FAQ should now be used only as background and technical reference until GSTN issues further communication.

What GST professionals should tell clients

CAs, tax practitioners and GST consultants should guide clients in a practical and non-alarming manner. Advisory 667 should now be read as background to a proposal that GSTN has placed on hold. Clients should not be told that 1 August 2026 remains an active implementation deadline.

• Review Bill-to/Ship-to and Combination transactions.
• Review possible ERP/API impact, but do not deploy proposal-driven production changes until further GSTN communication.
• Understand confidentiality of Ship-to GSTIN.
• Avoid wrong transaction classification.
• Keep Ship-to GSTIN / URP concepts documented for reference and future readiness.
• Review export and merchant exporter scenarios.
• Do not operationalise an e-Way Bill Closure SOP solely on the held proposal.
• Any optional technical testing should remain separate from production rollout while the proposal is on hold.

FAQs on GSTN Advisory 667

Final Note

This article records the FAQ material published under GSTN Advisory No. 667 dated 2 July 2026 together with the current hold position announced by GSTN Advisory 668 dated 29 July 2026.

GSTN stated on 29 July 2026 that implementation was kept on hold until further notice, that no related production-environment changes were required until further communication, and that the related advisories and FAQs would be withdrawn. The earlier FAQ material below should therefore be treated only as historical and technical background.

This article is intended for general awareness and practical preparedness only. It should not be treated as legal advice, tax opinion or a substitute for professional review of specific transactions.

Related TaxPower GST Resources

You may also find these TaxPower GST resources useful for GST return review, reporting and compliance workflows.