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 207 on exemption on lease of premises for residential purpose by company’s staff

GST update No 207 on exemption on lease of premises for residential purpose by company’s staff
Applicability of tax on rental income has been a matter of debate since erstwhile service tax regime. The government has granted exemption from levy of tax on dwellings and premises used for residential purpose. However, the dispute arises as to admissibility of exemption on letting out of building to the company for residential use by its employees. One such issue in alignment with the above stated subject matter was raised before Maharashtra AAR in the case of M/S KASTURI & SONS. LTD. The decision delivered in this case is the subject matter of discussion of our present update.
 
The applicant is owner of properties having 22 residential apartments. The rental/license fee of which is fixed at the rate of Rs. 145/- per Sq. Ft. It is proposed to let out on leave and license basis the premises to M/s Life Insurance Corporation of India for residential purposes of its staff members. The question raised is applicability of Notification 12/2017-CT(Rate) dated 28.06.2017.
 
The applicant submitted that the premises are let out for residential purposes. Further, there is restriction for usage of the apartments let out under clause 4.1 of the Proposed Agreement. Therefore, it was contended that merely because of the fact that the apartments were let out to LIC, for residential usage of staff members, it cannot be treated as used for commercial purpose. It was submitted that as per S.No. 21 of the said Notification also, exemption is given to nature of property and its usage and not by the status of the recipient.
 
The revenue authorities argued that the staff to whom the apartments are let out can sit in office and work more. This, consequently, will increase the profitability of the company and productivity of the employee. Therefore, it is let of for commercial purposes and not for residential purpose. Therefore, it was argued that benefit of exemption notification should not be availed by the applicant.
 
The AAR analysed the situation and went through the documents on record and the submissions of the applicant and the respondent.  It was held that as per the clause inserted in Agreement, there was specific restriction for usage of property for commercial purpose.  It was stated that to proceed further, the said service is a supply of service and therefore, SAC code is to be identified. Furthermore, as per the Notification No. 12/2017 dated 28.06.2017 also, the entry exempts GST on residential dwelling used for the purpose of residence. Nothing related to whom the services are to be supplied is mentioned in the exemption notification. Further, the exemption is qua supply of service and no qua the recipient of supply. Therefore, the contentions of appellant were upheld stating that exemption is provided in nature of property and its usage and not by status of the recipient. The submissions of revenue department were quashed being illogical since no explanation was provided as to how the employees will sit up late for the office work when office hours are already defined. Reference was made to the decision of West Bengal AAR in the case of M/s Borbheta Estate Pvt. Ltd.
 
The above decision is an important ruling for the business community since in cities like Mumbai, residential flats are often provided by the companies to its key executives for their residential purposes. Had the ruling been adverse, the said service would have come within the tax bracket and landlord licensor would have charged GST at the rate of 18% from the company. The emphasis laid by AAR on the purpose of use of leased premises and focusing on the substance instead of the recipient is commendable. It is expected that the AAR continue to deliver such favourable rulings in future as well.
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