Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  The GSTN has issued an Advisory dated 21.04.2026 about the introduction of an Offline Tool for the Invoice Management System (IMS)  *  CBIC extends due dates for filing of FORM GSTR 3B  for the month of April 2026 *  Interest cannot be imposed in adjudication order, if not demanded/quantified in show cause notice : Allahabad HC *  Wheelchairs with toileting facility eligible for exemption: CESTAT affirms customs duty exemption to importer *  Industries urge GST council to allow inverted duty refunds on input services *  Tamil Nadu GST dept introduced virtual hearing facility for GST appeals under under section 107 of the TNGST act: detailed guidelines  *  CIC urges authorities to implement GST evasion complaint tracking system *  Even if the assessee opts "NO" for personal hearing in form DRC-06 ,The mandatory requirement under section 75(4) to grant opportunity of hearing cannot be waived:Gujarat High Court  *  Glufosinate imports curbs imposed by govt *  Government extends Re-import period for exported cut & polished diamonds *  CIC flags lack of tracking system for tax evasion complaints,urges GST authorities to improve transparency *  No Custodial Interrogation needed in GST fraud case based on documentary evidence already in Department's Possession : Chattisgarh HC *  Orders under section cannot be sustained if passed without considering the taxpayer's objections and without granting a personal hearing:Gujarat High Court *  Mere cancellation of supplier's registration cannot,by itself,justify denial of ITC or cancellation of the recipient's registration:Bombay High Court *  High Court sets aside GST notice citing factual errors and natural justice violations *  Provisional Bank Attachment under Section. 110 of Customs Act Unsustainable Beyond Statutory period without Extension order: Bombay HC orders to defreeze accounts *  Post Clearance MRP Alteration by Distributor Does not attract Differential Customs Duty: CESTAT *  DGFT Expands scope of 'Screws' classification under RoDTEP Scheme  *  E-way bills surze to all time high of 140.6 million in March *  GST Exemption Allowed on Pure Labour Services for Standalone Houses: AAR  *  GST Payable Only on Margin in Second-Hand Car Sales, Subject to Strict Conditions and No ITC Claim: AAR *  DGFT rolls out procedure for allocation of calcined coke *  GST portal update : Pre-deposit amount now editable in Appeals *  J&K HC declared TMT scrap a 'Specified Good' eligibile for GST refunds under Support Scheme  *  Pigmy agents are employees of banks; no GST can be levied on commission  paid to them : Karnataka HC *  DGFT Revises HS Code Description for Screws Under RoDTEP *  GST Registration Cancellation Invalid Without Proper Service of Notice: Allahabad High Court. *  Bengaluru CGST | GST Backlog Appeals Deadline Fixed at June 30, 2026 *  No Time Bar on Refund of Service Tax for Services Not Rendered: CESTAT  Remands Indiabulls Case for Unjust Enrichment Check. *  Supreme Court Holds Renewable Energy Incentive Must Benefit Generators, Not Be Adjusted in Tariff
Subject News *   Delhi HC Quashes Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Improperly Served GST SCN *  KARNATAKA HIGH COURT REMANDS GST SHORTFALL MATTER DUE TO ABSENCE OF PERSONAL HEARING   *  CESTAT cancels confiscation and penalties on imported computer cabinet cases: Custom duty restricted to 111 surplus units *  Deposit of tax during search or investigation cannot be treated as 'Voluntary Payment' : Bombay High Court *  Section 76 of the CGST cannot be invoked where the tax has already been duly deposited, even if through another registration of the same entity: Madras High Court *  Sec 74 allows use of material regardless of source; illegality or flaws in section 67 search do not vitiate valid adjudication: HC *  Inter-State transfer of ITC on Amalgamation permissible as given under section 18(3) read with rule 41 of the CGST rules, 2017: Gujarat High Court *  HC: No GST on commisson paid to Pigmy Agents *  IGST refund denial on illegible bill of lading invalid absent chance to furnish docs; merit reconsideration in appeals directed: HC *  ITC is not admissible on GST paid on leasehold rights of land used fpr setting up an air seperation plant: AAAR,Tamil Nadu *  GST: No penalty under Section 74 after voluntary ITC reversal due to non-existent supplier : High Court *  TN AAAR denies GST ITC on Land Lease under Sec. 17(5)(d) for setting up plant and machinery *  GST proceedings quashed as notices sent to old address, despite updated address in registration *  Importer Can’t Be Penalised for Alleged IGCR Procedural Lapses Without Evidence of Departmental Error: CESTAT *  Structured Healthcare Training Not ‘Charitable Activity’, 18% GST Payable: AAR  *  CESTAT As The Appellate Authority For Central Sales Tax Disputes: A Paradigm Shift Under Finance Act, 2023 *   Rs. 25K Cost Imposed On SGST Joint Commissioner for Attaching Bank  Accounts Without Forming Mandatory “Opinion”: Bombay HC *   Ex-Parte GST Order Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice: Karnataka  High Court Quashes Adjudication and Bank Attachment.  *   Retrospective GST Cancellation Can’t Invalidate Genuine Transactions:  Jaipur Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Rs. 95,670 ITC Demand. *   GST Pre-Deposit Non-Compliance: Allahabad High Court Allows Appeal  Subject to Rs. 30 Lakh Balance Deposit, Recognises Offline Filing. *  Documentary Nature of Evidence: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Rs. 32.66 Crore Fake ITC Fraud Case *  Supreme Court Flags Systemic Bias in Army’s Permanent Commission Process for Women Officers *  Re-Determination of Land Compensation Can Be Based on Appellate Court Awards, Clarifies Scope of S. 28-A: Supreme Court. *  Supreme Court Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Costs On Rent Authority Officer For Acting Beyond Jurisdiction. *  DGGI Meerut | Court Denies Bail to Accused in Claiming Fake ITC And Export Refunds *  Denial of GST Rate Revision Benefit to Contractor Violates Article 14: Rajasthan HC *  GST Registration Cancellation for Non-Filing of Returns: Gauhati High Court Directs Restoration on Compliance. *   Supreme Court Quashes FEMA Adjudication Orders, Revives Proceedings at  Show Cause Stage. *   Higher Rank, Harsher Punishment Justified: Supreme Court Restores Dismissal  of Bank Manager in Misappropriation Case. *   Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation,  Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST UPDATE ON LEVY OF GST ON SALE OF DEVELOPED PLOTS 71/2020-21

GST UPDATE ON LEVY OF GST ON SALE OF DEVELOPED PLOTS 71/2020-21
The levy of GST on development charges is a matter of dispute as sale of land per se is out of the ambit of GST law. When the sale of land is not liable to GST, then how can the development of land be chargeable to GST but the logic does not come to the rescue of the assessees. In the present update, we seek to discuss the decision pronounced by the Gujarat AAR in the case of M/s Satyaja Infratech wherein it was affirmed that the activity of purchase of land and selling the land by converting into residential plots with basic facility is liable to GST attracting 18% under serial no. 3 of Notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017.
 
In this decision, the AAR without discussing as to the implication of the entry no. 5 of the Schedule III to CGST Act, 2017, produced below, has ruled that GST is applicable on the sale of developed plots. The entry no. 5 of Schedule III reads as follows:-
5. Sale of land and, subject to clause (b) of paragraph 5 of Schedule II, sale of building.
The paragraph 5(b) of Schedule II reads as follows:-
(b) construction of a complex, building, civil structure or a part thereof, including a complex or building intended for sale to a buyer, wholly or partly, except where the entire consideration has been received after issuance of completion certificate, where required, by the competent authority or after its first occupation, whichever is earlier.
 
The exception carved out in Schedule III is with respect to construction of complex, building, civil structure etc. and is not respect with developing of basic amenities on plot. Moreover, there is no completion certificate issued in case of plots and so the reference to paragraph 5(b) of Schedule II for levying tax on development of plots is totally fallacious. Therefore, in our opinion, the decision rendered by AAR is adhoc, without having legal backing of provisions of GST Law.
 
In our opinion, when a person develops land belonging to own and sells developed plots, the transaction is purely sale of land which is outside the ambit of GST. It is also relevant to note that stamp duty is paid on value of plot including development cost and so the transaction is purely that of sale of land. It is pertinent to mention here that the issue regarding levy of GST on transfer of development rights in case of Joint Development Agreements is being challenged before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court by real estate developers and the matter is sub-judice and awaited for final verdict. Accordingly, when the levy of GST on development rights itself is challenged, no GST should be leviable on development charges included in the sale of developed, particularly when the land is owned by person developing the land. In case of development of land by owner himself, no service is provided to third party so as to levy GST and the cost of development included in the cost of plot is sale of land which is not liable to GST.
 
Another dispute regarding this transaction is treatment of the said supply as composite or mixed supply. This is for the reason that the transaction involves supply of developed plot and the supply of development service. If the transaction is considered as composite supply, then the principal supply would become relevant, which in this case would be supply of plot and consequently no GST would be payable on the transaction. However, one may say that the transaction cannot be considered as composite supply because it consists of two or more taxable supplies but in the present case, supply of plot is covered under Schedule III, and is neither supply of goods nor supply of services. Sale of land is not taxable but GST is chargeable on development charges. On the other hand, if is considered that the transaction is mixed supply, then in that case, GST at the rate of 18% would be applicable on the entire consideration, including consideration for sale of plot which is not proper.
 
It is also pertinent to mention here that value of exempt supply includes sale of land as per Section 17(3) of CGST Act. Therefore, the developer would also be required to comply with the provisions of credit reversal if GST is paid on development charges and input tax credit is availed.  
 
As we can foresee numerous points of dispute in the issue of taxability of sale of developed plots, a suitable clarification should be issued by the government as the recent advance ruling seeks to raise confusion as regards levy of GST on sale of developed plots by the owner himself.   
 
This is solely for 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