Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Dept. Can’t Classify Product as Zarda Scented Tobacco After Repeatedly Approving It As Chewing Tobacco: CESTAT *  Mere Uploading Of GST Order On Portal Is Not “Valid” Service: Tripura HC *  CGST Can Proceed Even If SGST Closed Similar Case Earlier: Delhi HC *  SC upholds 28% GST on online gaming with retrospective effect. *  West Bengal Govt cuts E-way Bill Threshold limit to Rs. 50,000 for intra-state goods movement. *  Criminal Prosecution Under Central Excise Act Can’t Continue After CESTAT Sets Aside Duty Demand on Merits: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Orders for Denial of Personal Hearing; Remands Matter Subject to 10% Deposit *  Ex Parte GST Order: Madras High Court Directs Immediate Removal of Bank/ITC Attachment Upon 25% Deposit *  J.K. Cement Receives GST Demand Order of Rs 8,02,113/- from Ahmedabad Tax Authority *  Delhi Police EOW Busts Alleged Rs. 128 Crore GST Fake Invoice Network. *  REPLY TO SCN CAN’T BE TREATED AS “EMPTY FORMALITY”: ORISSA HIGH COURT QUASHES GST DEMAND OF RS. 57.30 LAKH *  Challenge to CGST Provisions restricting ITC to Bonafide Purchasers : Allahabad HC issues notice *  CBIC Notifies Revised Customs Tariff Values for Edible Oils, Gold, Silver, Brass Scrap and Areca Nuts *  Delhi HC Orders Removal of GST Attachment After Statutory 1 Year Period Expired *  GSTAT Extends Relaxed Appeal Filing Guidelines till December 31, 2026 *  AO fails to Provide Import - Export Data from DGFT to Taxpayer for Reconciliation *  Gold, Silver Imports To Get Costlier As Govt Raises Customs Duty To 10%  *  GSTAT Enables Pre-Payment Access to Document Upload and Checklist for GST Appeal Filing *  GST Portal Restrictions Can’t Override Statute: Gujarat HC Allows Cross-State Transfer Of CGST ITC After Amalgamation *  Centre Revises HS Codes for Large Diameter Steel Pipes Used in Oil & Gas Pipelines *  Customs Duty Liability Arises On Warehouse Clearance Date: Supreme Court *  Government lifts export ban on de-oiled rice bran *  CESTAT Grants 12% Interest on Pre-Deposit for Investigation from Date of Deposit till Refund and Denies Interest on Interest. *  Government Overhauls GST Classification Framework for Non-Alcoholic Beverages; Fruit Juice Drinks, Milk-Based Beverages and Caffeinated Drinks to Attract Revised 5% and 40% GST Rates from May 1, 2026 *  India’s gross GST collections hit a record Rs 2.42 lakh crore in April, up 8.7% *  Customs clearance stalled, revenue hit over MRP dispute *  Shipping Corporation explores Middle East routes as Hormuz tensions disrupt cargo movement *  India, Kenya signs MoU for exchange of pre-arrival customs information *  No demand of Taxes under Reverse Charge if Tax Already Discharged by Service Provider under forward charge *  The India-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement, signed "once-in-a-generation" deal that eliminates tariffs on 100% of Indian exports to New Zealand
Subject News *  Consignment Sales Can’t Be Reclassified as Inter-State Sales Based on Pre-Agreement Evidence: CESTAT *  Exporter Can’t Be Denied Advance Authorization Benefit Due To ICEGATE Technical Glitch: Delhi High Court *  No GST Demand For Mere Wrong Set-Off Of IGST Credit Under CGST And SGST Heads: Kerala HC. *  Cenvat Credit Can’t Be Denied on Input Services Having Nexus With Manufacturing Activities: CESTAT *  Pending Proceedings Can’t Survive Without Saving Clause: Calcutta High Court Quashes GST Demand of Rs. 6.28 Crore After Omission of Rule 96(10) *  Madras HC Quashes GST Demands on TASMAC (Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation) Bar Licence Fee *  GST Proceedings Cannot Survive Omitted Rule Without Saving Clause: Calcutta HC *  Provisional Release Can’t Be Denied Solely On Dept. Suspicion Of Misclassification And Undervaluation Of Imported Goods: CESTAT *  Businesses Should Not Be Kept Outside GST Regime Without Due Process: Gauhati High Court *  Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Reconsideration of Contractors’ Claim for Additional GST Payment After Tax Rate Hike From 12% to 18% *  S. 108 Statements Can’t Be Sole Basis Without Following Section 138B Procedure: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Frames Key Questions on Mandatory Distribution of ITC U/s 20 CGST Act *  Filing of Annexure-B for Refund Applications involving Accumulated ITC using the offline utility in GST portal: GSTN *  No Service Tax on Parent Company’s Un-Invoiced Cost Allocations Without Actual Service or Consideration: CESTAT  *  Calcutta High Court Upholds GST Classification of Polypropylene Leno Bags as Plastic Products *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  GSTAT Issues Major Bench Allocation Framework; All Appeals to First Go Before Division Bench *  ITC Blocking Without Reasoned Order Violates Rule 86A; Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Release of Credit *  Allahabad HC Refuses Bail to CGST Superintendent In Rs. 70 Lakh Bribery Case *  S.130 Can’t Be Invoked Without Prior Tax Determination U/s 73/74: Allahabad High Court Quashes GST Confiscation Proceedings *  SC grants Bail to Rs 54cr GST case  *  Karnataka HC Sets Aside Duplicate GST Orders, Orders Fresh Hearing on GSTIN Cancellation *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  Transfer Of Unutilized ITC After Amalgamation - Supreme Court Issues Notice *  PUNJAB & HARYANA HC QUASHES GST CANCELLATION NOTICE FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE CBIC ENQUIRY REPORT *  LICENSE FEE, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CHARGES NOT INCLUDIBLE IN CUSTOMS VALUE UNLESS THEY ARE A CONDITION OF SALE: CESTAT *  DELHI HC ORDERS REMOVAL OF GST ATTACHMENT AFTER STATUTORY 1 YEAR PERIOD EXPIRED *  CUSTOMS BROKER CAN’T BE FAULTED JUST BECAUSE EXPORTER’S GST REGISTRATION WAS PREVIOUSLY CANCELLED: CESTAT   *  Supreme Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Delhi HC Ruling Holding Real Operator Behind Fake GST Firms Liable As ‘Taxable Person  *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected Merely Because DRC-07 Was Not Uploaded On Portal: Bombay High Court  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST UPDATE NO 117 ON TAXABILITY OF ELECTRICITY CHARGES RECOVERED FROM TENANT

GST UPDATE NO 117 ON TAXABILITY OF ELECTRICITY CHARGES RECOVERED FROM TENANT
Since introduction of GST Law, there had been many complexities and questions raised regarding applicability of GST on various transactions. It is well settled law that the renting of commercial properties is subject to GST being supply of service as per entry 5(a) of Schedule II. However, the matter of dispute is whether the reimbursement towards electricity, water charges collected by the lessor form lessee shall fall within the ambit of GST? Similar issue was raised before Maharashtra Authority for Advance Ruling in the case of M/s. INDIANA ENGINEERING WORKS (BOMBAY) PVT. LTD. The reasoning adopted by the Maharashtra Advance Ruling is subject matter of our today’s update. The applicant sought for advance ruling on whether electricity and water charges paid by applicant and collected from recipient as reimbursement are liable to GST. The applicant contended that the reimbursement of charges collected do not have a character of supply under Section 7 of CGST Act, 2017. Further, the applicant is of view that as the charges are collected at actuals, the same will not form part of the taxable value of service of renting of immovable property. Hence, as per Section 15 of CGST act, 2017, the transaction value shall exclude the expenses incurred as a “Pure Agent” and hence, GST shall not be leviable. Reliance was placed by assessee in case of SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD. V/S C. CX &ST AND IN KIRAN GEMS PVT LTD. V/S CCE & ST. The Counsel of the department argued that GST is payable on electricity charges, water charges as these forms integral part of the immovable property for enjoyment of the right to use the said property. Furthermore, as per Section 15 of CGST Act, 2017, the transaction value shall include any incidental expenses incurred towards the value of consideration. The revenue also contended that conditions of Rule 33 of CGST Rules pertaining to pure agent are not fulfilled as the applicant is not authorized by the tenant to act as a pure agent. Moreover, making the payment of electricity and water charges to the government is the responsibility of the applicant as the connection is in the name of applicant only. Hence, the recovery of charges on reimbursement basis would not qualify as “pure agent” and cannot be deducted from the taxable value of service. The Maharashtra Advance Ruling held that utilities such as water, electricity etc. are basic amenities without which occupation of premises would not be possible. The provision of essential services is mandatory to be provided by the landlord. Hence, the reimbursement charges collected form the part of consideration. Further, going through Section 15(c) of CGST Act, it was concluded that the charges shall be included in transaction value of supply as these are incidental expenses. Further, the AAR upheld the view of the department concluding that the applicant shall not be treated as “Pure Agent” as conditions of Rule 33 are not fulfilled. Therefore, it was concluded that the reimbursed electricity and water charges charged by the applicant from the tenant by issuing debit note shall be considered in taxable value and GST shall be levied on it. The present judgement covers an issue which has been at the center stage for disputes since Service Tax regime. In case of UNION OF INDIA V/S M/S INTERCONTINENTAL CONSULTANTS AND TECHNOCRATS LTD., hon’ble Supreme Court had held that no service tax is leviable on the reimbursement of expenses which are incurred while providing a Service. However, post decision, Section 67 of Finance Act was amended and the definition of “consideration” was amended to include reimbursable expenditure or cost which was made effective from 14.05.2015. Similarly, there are divergent views on the said issue in GST era. However, after observing the decision pronounced by AAR, applicant needs to establish a concrete evidence so as to prove his contention of satisfaction of conditions prescribed for “Pure Agent” as per Rule 33 of CGST Rules, 2017.
Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com