Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Missing seized records must be considered while testing ITC claim; duplicate GST demands ordered corrected: Delhi High Court. *  GST appeal can’t be rejected without addressing taxpayer’s grounds: Allahabad High Court. *  Surplus IGST credit can offset CGST, SGST shortfall: GSTAT. *  GST refund can’t be denied when cancelled airfares are returned with tax: GSTAT. *  3 Hearing notices issued within 2 minutes: Gujarat High Court flags portal flaw, seeks report. *  GSTR-9, GSTR-9C filing for FY 2025-26 enabled; pending GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B must be filed first. *  Dupattas are exempt fabrics, can’t be taxed as fibres at 4%: Madras High Court. *  Full transitional credit allowed on capital goods received after GST rollout: GSTAT denies Rs. 6.99 lakh export duty credit. *  GST return mismatch alone can’t justify fraud proceedings: GSTAT orders fresh adjudication under section 73. *  Supplier found non-existent later can’t alone justify input tax credit denial: GSTAT. *  GST interest stops once tax reaches government account, can’t run until return filing: GSTAT. *  Cancelled flat booking- GST refund can’t be denied without excluding COVID period from limitation: GSTAT. *  India notifies rules of origin for India–New Zealand FTA. *  Incomplete E-bike kits classifiable as complete vehicles, but not eligible for CKD duty concession: CESTAT. *  Same GST rate on main input and output can’t by itself bar inverted duty refund: GSTAT. *  Unjust enrichment doesn’t apply to customs refunds from assessments finalised before July 13, 2006: Gujarat High Court. *  CENVAT credit can’t be denied solely because plant And machinery are embedded in earth: Karnataka High Court. *  DFIA exports ineligible for RoDTEP benefits; customs directs repayment with applicable interest. *  Second E-Way bill alone doesn’t prove another supply: GSTAT. *  Bail denied in Rs. 1.19 crore fake GST refund case over risk of accused absconding again: Punjab and Haryana High Court. *  GST registration can be restored after revocation deadline if outstanding dues are paid: Gauhati High Court. *  Multiple GST proceedings over same suppliers: Calcutta High Court directs dept. to share findings for adjudication. *  E-Governance portal services not OIDAR, fixed deposit interest not taxable: CESTAT. *  Rs. 500 Stamp duty required on authority letters for CAs, CMA and GST practitioners in Pune GST division.  *  Rs. 1.10 crore GST refund must be paid in cash after business closure: Allahabad High Court. *  Godown rent attracts 18% GST even when used exclusively for exempt agricultural warehousing: AAR. *  GST portal launches "Multi-State Registration" facility: one master TRN for registration applications across multiple States/UTs. *  RoDTEP scheme extended till 31st December, 2026.  *  Mere disagreement with order can’t override Rs. 20 lakh appeal limit: GSTAT. *  Customs interest can’t be backdated before confiscation liability is determined; nearly 8 year period excluded: Delhi High Court.
Subject News *  GST summons: anticipatory bail maintainable without arrest order, but relief denied in evasion case: Allahabad High Court. *  GST Appeal can’t be decided without hearing taxpayer’s objections to fresh evidence: Allahabad High Court. *  GST ITC can’t be reversed merely because supplier grants discount without reducing tax liability: GSTAT. *  Mere quoting of GST provision is not a valid charge: GSTAT quashes ITC denial. *  Personal hearing mandatory before adverse GST order, even without taxpayer’s request: Rajasthan High Court. *  Parallel bail pleas without full disclosure amount to abuse of process Rs. 43.08 crore GST case sent for fresh hearing: Supreme Court. *  GST refund based on unchallenged advance ruling can’t be recovered using later circular: GSTAT. *  Payment of GST alone doesn’t end interest and penalty liability when tax and interest remain unpaid beyond 30 days of notice: GSTAT. *  GST demand over builders’ 80% procurement rule requires reasoned adjudication: GSTAT. *  Eligible ITC doesn’t automatically entitle taxpayers to compensation cess refund on domestic sales: GSTAT. *  GST confiscation order passed before reply deadline invalid: GSTAT. *  GST interest can’t be retained after tax refund on delayed export receipts: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  GST appeal can’t be dismissed over pre-deposit shortfall without opportunity To respond: Bombay High Court. *  DGGI SCN can’t be challenged before reply and adjudication:Chhattisgarh High Court. *  GST input tax credit can’t be denied solely due to supplier’s retrospective registration cancellation: GSTAT. *  GST notice must explain fraud allegations; merely repeating section 74 Is not enough:  Himachal Pradesh High Court. *  Audit detection alone can’t justify GST fraud penalty; specific suppression must be proved: GSTAT. *  GST order uploaded only under ‘Additional Notices’ tab without separate intimation set aside: Calcutta High Court. *  Service Tax appeal can’t be rejected for missing pre-deposit proof when payment is already recorded: CESTAT. *  SGST dept. can’t hear appeal against CGST order: Calcutta High Court. *  Mere dispatch of tax order can’t prove service or make appeal time-barred: CESTAT. *  Dealer incentives can’t be taxed merely on ledger entries: CESTAT. *  DGFT orders quashed for failure to supply DRI letter relied upon in SCN: Bombay High Court. *  GST penalty u/s 122(1A) can’t apply to Pre-2021 transactions; unregistered beneficiaries also covered: Delhi High Court. *  Expired E-way bill caused by wrong PIN code can’t justify GST penalty without intent to evade tax: GSTAT. *  Used railway rails can’t be taxed as track material without proof they are fit for reuse: CESTAT. *  Earlier DGGI notice doesn’t bar separate GST demand on different issue: Delhi High Court. *  ITC dispute involves no question of law: GSTAT directs appeal to Vice-President. *  Earlier DGGI notice doesn’t bar separate GST demand On different issue: Delhi High Court. *  No E-way bill required for interstate goods movement in november 2017: GSTAT quashes detention and penalty.  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST UPDATE No. 135 ON TAXABILITY OF COMPOSITE CONSTRUCTION, O & M CONTRACT

GST UPDATE No. 135 ON TAXABILITY OF COMPOSITE CONSTRUCTION, O & M CONTRACT
It has always been a point of dispute when there is supply of two or more goods and services together because then the concept of composite/mixed supply comes into picture. Recently, an issue was raised before the West Bengal AAR in the case of SUEZ INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED wherein it was enquired as to whether the contract of “Construction as well as operation and maintenance under a contract” will be considered as a composite supply or as a divisible supply liable to GST individually. The outcome of this decision is the subject matter of discussion of our present GST update. The applicant has entered two separate contracts for construction and O&M of water wastage under a single tender accepted with Kolkata Municipal Corporation. The applicant submits that the contract has a particular sequence of activity whereby O&M necessarily follows successful works completion of construction. It could be implied that a breach in construction works has a definitive impact on the O&M scope of work. The applicant contended that both the contracts are interdependent on each other as second contract cannot be executed independently of the first contract. Therefore, the provisions contained in section 8 of the CGST Act,2017 will apply to a current situation as it is a composite supply and the rate of GST applicable will be as attracted for principal supply. Further, as per para 6 of the Schedule II to the CGST Act, 2017 composite supply of works contract will be considered as a supply of services. AAR West Bengal had gone through the contract entered by both parties and concluded that design and construction phase entitle the contractor to apply for certificate of sectional completion only. Also, both the contracts are interdependent of each other. Both the contracts are entered into based on single tender. Based on these conditions, current arrangement will be treated as composite supply of DB and O&M which qualifies as ‘works contract’ as defined in clause (119) of section 2 of the GST Act. Further, as per Para 6 (a) of Schedule II to the GST Act, workscontracts as defined in clause (119) of section 2 shall be treated as a supply of services. So, the instant supply shall be treated as supply of services. Furthermore, as the supply was made to Municipal Corporation, the concessional rate of GST @12% would be applicable in the present case. It is worth mentioning that the Andhra Pradesh AAR has also taken the similar view in case OF SHAPOORJI PALLONJI & COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED whereby the applicant was providing the services of construction and O& M to GVSCCL (a govt. undertaking). Here, the applicant was providing services of Construction of the Project, development of the Project which included plantation, landscaping etc. as well as maintenance of the project. AAR concluded that works contract has been defined under clause (119) of the section (2) of the CGST Act and as per serial No. 6, Schedule II of CGST Act, 2017 composite supply of works contract will be considered as supply of service and tax will be charged accordingly. In both the above cases, AAR has taken affirmative view that construction and maintenance together would constitute composite supply of works contracts and tax on the same will be charged by treating it as supply of services. However, it is worth pointing out that in case of works contract, there is no need to invoke the provision contained in section 8 of composite supply as the entry 6 of schedule II to the CGST Act, 2017 clearly states that the works contract is to be treated as supply of service.
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