Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  GST registration cancellation without reasons amounts to ‘Economic Death’ of business: Supreme Court. *  No GST refund if appeal before GSTAT is filed late: Gujarat High Court. *  Mere upload of GST notice on portal not valid service, appeal limitation won’t start: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Taxpayer can’t be penalised for missing notices hidden under ‘Additional Notices/Orders’: Calcutta High Court allows fresh adjudication. *  State tax officer can’t issue GST SCN beyond CBIC-assigned jurisdiction: Bombay High Court stays recovery proceedings. *  Earlier 7.5% Pre-Deposit must count towards mandatory 10% for Appeal: Uttarakhand high court quashes CESTAT Order. *  Third Parties can’t challenge GST Advance Rulings merely due to financial impact: Karnataka HC *  GST SCN generated using AI tool quashed: Punjab & Haryana High Court *  Bank Attachment Quashed as Madras HC Quashes GST Order Issued Against Deceased Person *  ITC Blocking Order for Failure to Record ‘Reason to Believe’ U/R 86A Quashed: Allahabad High Court *  Govt Extends GSTAT Appeal Filing Deadline From 30 June to July 31, 2026 *  GST Demand on RWA Stayed: Allahabad High Court Questions Taxability of Electricity Distribution to Flat Owners *  CBIC Clarifies Jurisdiction After GST Registration Transfer: Earlier Proceedings Remain Valid, New Officer to Continue Action *  GST authorities’ certification not mandatory for reimbursement, but tax payment must be proven: Karnataka HC *  Contractor can’t seek gst reimbursement through writ when contract has arbitration clause: Karnataka HC *  Unsigned Order Is No Order in Law: AP HC Quashes GST Assessment Order for Want of Officer’s Signature *  Customs Can’t Levy Rs. 1.36 Crore Cost Recovery Charges Without Proof of Full-Day Officer Deployment: CESTAT  *  12% IGST Payable On Imported Dialysis Machine Parts: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Admits Challenge to GST Limitation Extension Notifications; Grants Protection Against Coercive Recovery *  Criminal Case Can’t Run Parallel to GST Proceedings on Same Facts: Allahabad High Court *  Allahabad High Court Stays GST Detention Order; Directs Release of Vehicle and Goods on Deposit of Rs. 1.44 Lakh *  Service Tax Can’t Be Levied on Loss-Making Contracts: Gujarat High Court *  GSTN Mandates Ship-to GSTIN in e-Invoice and e-Way Bill APIs; Introduces Voluntary e-Way Bill Closure Facility from August 1, 2026 *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected as Time-Barred When Taxpayer Was Pursuing Rectification Remedy: Telangana High Court *  Absence of E-Way Bill and Transport Documents Justifies Customs Seizure U/s 110: Gauhati HC *  Madras High Court Upholds GST Late Fee and Penalty for Non-Filing of Annual Return, Dismisses Challenge  *  GST Records, Purchase Documents Sufficient to Discharge Burden Under Customs Act: CESTAT Orders Release of 3.65 Kg Gold  *  No Sugar Cess Payable on Sugar Exported Out of India: CESTAT *  Road Construction Services Exempt and SCN Time-Barred: CESTAT Quashes Service Tax Demand Based Solely on Form 26AS  *  ITC Freeze Upheld After GST Dept Find Suppliers Were Allegedly Fake Bill-Trading Entities: Madras HC 
Subject News *  Input service benefits can’t be denied: CESTAT allows export refund despite MMTC acting as Canalising agency. *  No service tax demand without proof of service of SCN: CESTAT. *  Service tax demand quashed as dept. fails to prove service of SCN: CESTAT *  GST : Mere allegation of inadequate consideration of reply not enough to invoke writ jurisdiction: Delhi High Court *  Onerous conditions imposed for provisional release of seized imported goods shouldn’t amount to virtual denial of relief: CESTAT. *  GST SCN without alleging fraud cannot invoke sec. 74: Karnataka High Court quashes adjudication order. *  Extended Limitation Can’t Be Invoked Merely on Form 26AS Data: CESTAT *  Revenue-Sharing with Restaurants Not Taxable as Business Support Service: CESTAT *  R. 6(3) Option Can’t Be Forced on Taxpayer; CESTAT Quashes Rs. 12.36 Crore CENVAT Credit Demand *  Excise Duty | Power Consumption Alone Can’t Prove Clandestine Manufacture: Karnataka High Court *  Madras High Court Examines DGGI’s Authority to Issue GST Penalty Orders Under Section 122, Adds DGGI as Party *  Proceedings under omitted r. 96(10) can’t survive without saving clause: andhra pradesh high court quashes gst refund recovery *  Excise duty power consumption alone can’t prove clandestine manufacture: karnataka high court *  Madras high court rules GST show cause notices must disclose grounds for invoking extended limitation *  Court Can’t Direct Extension GST Return Deadlines or Waive Interest and Penalties: Karnataka High Court *  GST Notifications Can’t Go Beyond GST Council Recommendations: Madras High Court Quashes SCN on Branded Pulses *  Appeal Can’t Be Dismissed for Delay When Dept’s Own Order Mis-states Limitation Period: CESTAT *  No Evidence of KYC or Due Diligence Breach By Customs Broker: CESTAT Quashes Licence Revocation in Export Overvaluation Case *  Glucometers Are Chemical Analysis Instruments Classifiable Under Tariff Heading 9027: CESTAT *  Validity of Post-GST Service Tax Proceedings Upheld: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Challenge to S. 73 SCN *  Rectified GST Refund Applications Can’t Be Rejected as Time-Barred If Original Refund Claim Was Filed Within Limitation: Gujarat HC *  Service Tax Refund Can’t Be Denied as Time-Barred When Levy Itself Is Unconstitutional: Gujarat High Court *  Same Officer Can’t Act As Auditor & Adjudicator: Karnataka High Court *  Karnataka High Court Condones 324-Day Delay, Revives Customs Appeal in Jewellery Pilferage Case  *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Order Passed Ex Parte Despite Prior ITC Reversal; Lifts Bank Attachment *  Tobacco Process Doesn’t Amount to Manufacturing: Madras High Court Quashes Rs. 1.32 Crore Compensation Cess Demand  *  Recovery Notice Unsustainable After Voluntary Reversal of Unutilised Credit: CESTAT  *  GST | ‘System Generated’ SCN Without Officer Details Invalid: Allahabad HC  *  Electronic Records Without Statutory Certification Requirements Can’t Justify Undervaluation Allegations: CESTAT *  Madras High Court Stays GST Order, Finds Prima Facie Merit in Plea Against S. 74 Proceedings Based on S. 73 Intimation  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST UPDATE ON ITC AVAILABILITY TO LANDOWNER PART-9:-

GST UPDATE ON ITC AVAILABILITY TO LANDOWNER PART-9:-
GST UPDATE ON ITC AVAILABILITY TO LANDOWNER PART-9:-
 
In earlier update, we have discussed about the taxability of land developed into plots for sale. In the present update, we seek to discuss the provision regarding input tax credit availability to the landowner with respect to notification no. 03/2019-Central Tax (Rate) dated 29.03.2019.
Before proceeding to discuss the issue, it is imperative to observe the provisions contained as regards the definition of ‘promoter’ given under section 2(zk) of the RERA which reads as follows:-
a. a person who constructs or causes to be constructed an independent building or a building consisting of apartments, or converts an existing building or a part thereof into apartments, for the purpose of selling all or some of the apartments to other persons and includes his assignees; or
b. a person who develops the land into a project, whether or not the person also constructs structures on any of the plots, for the purpose of selling to other persons all or some of the plots in the said project, whether with or without structures thereon; or
c. any development authority or any other public body in respect of allottees of—
  • Buildings or apartments, as the case may be, constructed by such authority or body on lands owned by them or placed at their disposal by the Government; or
  • Plots owned by such authority or body or placed at their disposal by the Government, for the purpose of selling all or some of the apartments or plots; or
d. An apex State level co-operative housing finance society and a primary co operative housing society which constructs apartments or buildings for its Members or in respect of the allottees of such apartments or buildings; or
e. Any other person who acts himself as a builder, coloniser, contractor, developer, estate developer or by any other name or claims to be acting as the holder of a power of attorney from the owner of the land on which the building or apartment is constructed or plot is developed for sale; or
f. Such other person who constructs any building or apartment for sale to the general public.
Explanation—For the purposes of this clause, where the person who constructs or converts a building into apartments or develops a plot for sale and the persons who sell apartments or plots are different persons, both of them shall be deemed to be the promotersand shall be jointly liable as such for the functions and responsibilities specified, under this Act or the rules and regulations made thereunder;”
The above cited definition is wide enough to consider ‘landowner’ in a Joint Development Agreement as promoter. Consequently, the landowner is also eligible to claim the benefit of concessional GST rate applicable to the developer. Now, the question arises is whether the developer and landowner can exercise different options for paying GST with respect to ongoing projects like developer paying tax at new concessional rate and the landowner paying tax at old rates? Well, the answer is ‘Yes’ because landowner is considered as promoter under RERA which is also squarely applicable to the notification no. 03/2019-Central Tax (Rate) dated 29.03.2019. However, the practical difficulties associated with opting different option by the landowner and developer will be discussed in suceeding paragraphs.
According to Fourth Proviso to the conditions stated in the notification no. 03/2019-Central Tax (Rate) dated 29.03.2019, the clause (ii) allows the landowner to avail input tax credit of the tax charged by the developer provided the landowner sells the apartments before completion certificate/first occupancy, whichever is earlier and pays tax not less than that charged by the developer. Furthermore, as discussed in the preceding paragraph that there is no restriction on landowner as regards payment of tax under same scheme as that opted by the developer. Therefore, there may be four situations:-
 
 
Situation Number Option Exercised by Developer Option Exercised by the Landowner Whether ITC admissible to the landowner?
1. Pay GST at old rates 18%/12% with one third deduction of land value along with input tax credit facility Pay GST at new concessional rates of 1%/5% without facility of ITC. Yes, if the apartments are sold prior to completion certificate/first occupancy, whichever is earlier. There is exception for the landowner for availing credit in the notification if tax paid is equal to or more than the tax charged by the developer. However, since in this case, the tax paid by the landowner is not equal to/more than the tax charged by the developer, input tax credit cannot be taken by landowner.
2. Pay GST at new concessional rates of 1%/5% without facility of ITC. Pay GST at old rates 18%/12% with one third deduction of land value along with input tax credit facility Yes, if the apartments are sold prior to completion certificate/first occupancy, whichever is earlier.
3. Pay GST at old rates 18%/12% with one third deduction of land value along with input tax credit facility Pay GST at old rates 18%/12% with one third deduction of land value along with input tax credit facility Yes, if the apartments are sold prior to completion certificate/first occupancy, whichever is earlier.
4. Pay GST at new concessional rates of 1%/5% without facility of ITC. Pay GST at new concessional rates of 1%/5% without facility of ITC. Yes, if the apartments are sold prior to completion certificate/first occupancy, whichever is earlier. There is exception for the landowner for availing credit if tax paid is equal to or more than the tax charged by the developer. Since, the tax charged by the landowner is equal to that charged by the developer, input tax credit may be availed by the landowner.
 
On the basis of above table, it is concluded that the landowner is eligible to avail input tax credit in situation number 2, 3 and 4 only. The landowner is not eligible to avail input tax credit in situation no. 1 and so we can conclude that the situation no. 1 will not be feasible to be adopted in practical life. This is for the reason that the landowner will be debarred from availing input tax credit in situation no. 1.
 
Moving the analysis further, it is worth noting that first proviso in the conditions to the notification no.03/2019-Central Tax (Rate) dated 29.03.2019, states that the tax shall be paid in cash by debiting electronic cash ledger only. It is submitted that this condition is applicable for all promoters including landowner and so it can be concluded that although the fourth proviso entitles landowner to avail input tax credit of the tax charged by the developer, there is restriction to utilise the said credit in discharging the tax liability under the notification no. 03/2019-Central Tax (Rate) dated 29.03.2019. One can say that the provision allowing input tax credit to the landowner is not lucrative in real sense as even in situation no. 4, landowner will have to discharge GST in cash. In our opinion, the restriction as regards payment of tax in cash should be removed for landowner if he has opted to pay tax under notification no. 03/2019-Central Tax (Rate) dated 29.03.2019, so that the true purpose of allowing the facility of input tax credit can be achieved because availability of input tax credit without facility to utilise is not facility in real sense.                       
This is solely for the educational purpose.
You can reach us at www.capradeepjain.com, at our facebook page on
https://www.facebook.com/GSTTODAYBYPRADEEPJAIN/ as well as follow us on Twitter at https://www.twitter.com/@capradeepjain21
                                          
 
 
 
 
 
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