Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Service tax penalty can’t survive when assessee acted on dept.’s own view of non-taxability: Delhi High Court. *  GST section 74 extended limitation questionable when form 26AS mismatch was already known: Karnataka High Court grants interim relief. *  CGST demand prima facie impermissible after state GST settlement under section 128A: Bombay High Court. *  Supreme Court asks GSTAT to sympathetically consider delay as taxpayers pursued remedy before wrong forum. *  Supreme Court stays Tripura High Court ruling protecting genuine buyers from ITC denial over supplier’s GST default. *  Diary entries alone can’t prove clandestine removal of goods: CESTAT quashes excise penalty on steel trader. *  Customs could investigate preferential tariff claims even before sec. 28DA: Delhi High Court. *  Customs dept. relied on fake AI generated case laws: supreme court quashes Rs. 425.28 crore penalty. *  No GST exemption in affiliation and annual registration charges for admission or conduct Of examinations: GSTAT. *  Mere invoices, cheque payments insufficient to establish genuine movement of goods: GSTAT restores Rs. 43.44 lakh ITC demand. *  Consolidated GST show cause notice covering multiple financial years is not without jurisdiction: Delhi High Court. *  Construction of independent houses on separate plots not taxable as ‘Residential Complex’ without common facilities: CESTAT. *  GST penalty exceeding statutory maximum unsustainable; Allahabad High Court quashes ? 50,000/- penalty after taxpayer filed return and paid late fee. *  GST order against standard chartered bank passed without hearing set aside by Bombay High Court. *  Retracted statements can’t be relied upon without cross-examination: CESTAT quashes gold confiscation. *  Burden to prove misclassification lies on customs department: CESTAT. *  CESTAT quashes Rs. 98 lakh excise demand on clearance of used refractory brick scrap. *  Service tax demand on irrigation works quashed: Karnataka High Court rules sale of goods component not taxable as service. *  GSTAT restores tax and penalty for transporting iron scrap without E-way bill citing intent to evade tax. *  Madras High Court stays GST recovery from directors without opportunity to show cause under section 89. *  Madras high court stays GST recovery notice against directors; finds prima facie case on applicability of section 79(1)(c). *  Procedural lapses can’t justify harsh punishment without serious customs breach: CESTAT quashes customs broker licence revocation. *  Service tax payable on land leasing and sports complex charges: CESTAT. *  Settled customs dispute can’t be reopened through Article 226 challenge to interest liability: Delhi High Court. *  Mere facilitation of customs clearance can’t establish knowledge of smuggling: Madras High Court. *  GST registration cancellation stayed: Allahabad High Court questions 99% ITC utilisation cap under rule 86B. *  Composition scheme lapses automatically on crossing Rs. 1.5 crore turnover: GSTAT. *  Gujarat High Court quashes GST cancellation orders after officer relied on non-existent AI-generated case laws. *  Importers liable for customs duty benefits availed through manipulated scrips: Delhi High Court. *  Procedural E-way bill lapse alone can’t justify penalty where genuine transaction and absence of tax evasion are established: GSTAT.
Subject News *  Documentary evidence dominates probe, further custody unwarranted: mumbai court grants bail in Rs. 22.44 crore customs duty evasion case. *  Business premises can’t remain sealed for non-participation in GST search: Allahabad High Court. *  GST pre-deposit must be refunded proportionately when taxpayer partly succeeds in appeal: Bombay High Court. *  Supreme Court grants 30 days to file GST appeal; keeps pre-deposit issue open due to deposit in parallel CGST proceedings. *  GST demand can’t exceed amount proposed in SCN: Allahabad High Court quashes Rs. 20.47 Crore order. *  Hundreds-of-crores GST demand and heavy 10% pre-deposit no ground to bypass statutory appeal: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Delhi High Court refuses to entertain challenge to gold confiscation due to statutory appeal remedy and unexplained delay. *  Procedural error in customs broker licence inquiry can be rectified through remand: Delhi High Court. *  GSTR-2A mismatch alone can’t justify ITC denial without invoice-wise verification; personal hearing mandatory: GSTAT. *  GST order passed without uploading personal hearing notices violates sec. 75(4): Allahabad High Court. *  TAX EVASION - Sec. 74 GST SCN quashed for not spelling out fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression: Allahabad High Court. *  STPI’s SOFTEX certification and NoC charges taxable as business support services: CESTAT. *  Suspicion can’t replace proof: CESTAT quashes penalty in alleged gold-smuggling operation. *   Limitation runs from communication of order: Madras High Court upholds rejection of delayed GST Appeals. *  Rajasthan High Court quashes GST demand over unsigned show cause notice. *  ITC recovery upheld where supplier failed to deposit GST: Rajasthan High Court. *  Customs commissioner’s empowered to make port trust liable for duty on pilfered goods: Supreme Court. *  Rectification proceedings can’t be used to challenge an uncontested GST assessment through a writ petition: Andhra Pradesh HC. *  GST proceedings against deceased proprietor unsustainable without notice to legal heir: GSTAT. *  Mere availment of ineligible self-assessed ITC doesn’t amount to suppression without evidence of fraud or wilful misstatement: GSTAT. *  Disposal of mining overburden by entity authorised by mining lease holder constitutes taxable service: CESTAT. *  Toll plaza data not mandatory for ITC refund: GSTAT. *  Disputed GST fraud allegations require investigation: Punjab and Haryana High Court makes interim bail absolute in alleged fraud and GST fraud case. *  Non-manufacturer contractor liable to deposit excess excise duty collected from buyer: CESTAT. *  GST order can’t reject taxpayer’s reply as “not satisfactory” without reasons: Madhya Pradesh High Court. *  Uncorroborated statements can’t establish alleged diversion of duty-free goods: CESTAT. *  Erection services were not liable to service tax prior to 10th september 2004: CESTAT. *  Sec. 74 GST notice must spell out statutory ingredients for invoking extended tax demand proceedings: Allahabad High Court. *  No jurisdictional bar under section 6(2)(b) in parallel CGST SGST proceedings: Delhi High Court refuses to bypass GST appeal remedy. *  Madras High Court remits GST demand for fresh adjudication after taxpayer claims it was unaware of SCN following business closure.  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST UPDATE ON RCM INTRODUCED IN REAL ESTATE SECTOR

GST UPDATE ON RCM INTRODUCED IN REAL ESTATE SECTOR
GST UPDATE ON RCM INTRODUCED IN REAL ESTATE SECTOR:-
In earlier updates, we have discussed the basic features of the new scheme introduced for the real estate sector by the government recently. In the present update, we seek to discuss the provisions pertaining to of reverse charge mechanism in the real estate sector and its implications thereon. As we know that there are two types of reverse charge mechanism in GST- one under section 9(3) pertaining to specified categories of goods and services and other under section 9(4) pertaining to purchases by unregistered persons. The present update seeks to discuss the notification no. 07/2019-Central Tax (Rate) dated 29.03.2019 issued under section 9(4) of the CGST Act, 2017 with respect to purchases from unregistered persons. The following entries have been inserted for enabling reverse charge mechanism for developers in case of purchases from unregistered persons:-
  1. The promoter has been specified as the recipient liable to pay tax under reverse charge mechanism for supply of such goods and services or both which constitute shortfall from the minimum value of goods or services or both required to be purchased by a promoter for construction of project in a financial year or part of financial year till the date of issuance of completion certificate or first occupation, whichever is earlier.
  2. The promoter has been specified as the recipient liable to pay tax under reverse charge mechanism for cement which constitute shortfall from the minimum value of goods or services or both required to be purchased by a promoter for construction of project in a financial year or part of financial year till the date of issuance of completion certificate or first occupation, whichever is earlier.
  3. The promoter has been specified as the recipient liable to pay tax under reverse charge mechanism for capital goods falling under any chapter in the first schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, supplied to a promoter for construction of a project on which tax is payable or paid at the concessional rates.
General Points from Real Estate Rate Notification No. 03/2019-Central Tax (Rate) dated 29.03.2019 which have impact on the present notification:-
 
  1. Proviso no. 5 to the notification states that eighty per cent of the value of input and input services, (other than exceptions as mentioned below) used in supplying the service shall be received from registered supplier only. However, the condition of 80% procurement will not be applicable for the following inputs/input services (being exceptions)-
  2. Services by way of grant of development rights
  3. Long term lease of land against upfront payment in the form of premium, salami, development charges etc.
  4. FSI (including additional FSI)
  5. Electricity
  6. High speed diesel
  7. Motor spirit
  8. Natural Gas
  9. It has been stated that in proviso no. 6 that the inputs and input services on which tax is paid on reverse charge basis shall be deemed to have been purchased from the registered person.
  10. It is further stated in proviso no. 7 that where value of input and input services received from registered suppliers during the financial year (or part of the financial year till the date of issuance of completion certificate or first occupation of the project, whichever is earlier) falls short of the said threshold of 80 per cent., tax shall be paid by the promoter on value of input and input services comprising such shortfall at the rate of eighteen percent on reverse charge basis and all the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 shall apply to him as if he is the person liable for paying the tax in relation to the supply of such goods or services or both.
  11. However, the proviso no. 8 overrides the provisions of above mentioned provisos and states that notwithstanding anything contained herein above, where cement is received from an unregistered person, the promoter shall pay tax on supply of such cement at the applicable rates on reverse charge basis and all the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, shall apply to him as if he is the person liable for paying the tax in relation to such supply of cement.
  12. The Explanation no. 1 to the notification further clarifies that the promoter shall maintain project wise account of inward supplies from registered and unregistered supplier and calculate tax payments on the shortfall at the end of the financial year and shall submit the same in the prescribed form electronically on the common portal by end of the quarter following the financial year. The tax liability on the shortfall of inward supplies from unregistered person so determined shall be added to his output tax liability in the month not later than the month of June following the end of the financial year.
  13.  Notwithstanding anything contained in Explanation 1 above, tax on cement received from unregistered person shall be paid in the month in which cement is received.
On harmoniously reading the above provisions, the following conclusions have been drawn:-
  1. Promoter is liable to purchase all capital goods from registered persons for the project otherwise the promoter will be required to pay GST at the applicable rate under reverse charge mechanism.
  2. The purchases of inputs/input services are also required to be made from registered persons to the extent of 80%. The assessee is required to compute the shortfall and pay tax only on shortfall at the rate of 18% except on cement and capital goods. The rate of tax applicable to cement and capital goods will be considered while paying tax under reverse charge mechanism. It is submitted that although for the computation of 80%, cement will be included but all purchases of cement from un-registered suppliers will attract payment of GST at the rate of 28% under reverse charge mechanism and this is also clear from the illustrations given in the notification no. 03/2019-Central Tax (Rate) dated 29.03.2019. Therefore, promoters are to ensure that the cement is being purchased from registered suppliers only else they will be liable to pay tax under reverse charge mechanism.
  3. One major issue that will be faced by the condition of purchasing 80% inputs/input services from registered persons is that the promoter/developer will be required to pay GST at the rate of 18% on the shortfall irrespective of the nature of inputs/input services. Furthermore, the promoter will be required to pay GST even if the shortfall consists of exempted inputs/input services. To illustrate, water is exempted but it is main input for construction industry. It is also pertinent to mention that as per the provision contained in 23(1), any person exclusively engaged in the business of supplying goods that are not liable to tax or wholly exempt are not liable to registration. Consequently, the purchase of water will also be leviable to 18% GST under reverse charge mechanism which is totally against the basic framework of GST. Similarly, there will be interest expenses incurred by the promoter which is exempt but will have to be considered for the purpose of computing 80% inputs/input services and will be liable to GST at the rate of 18%. Well, one may interpret that the government assumes that the proportion of exempted inputs/input services is to the extent of 20% only as the non-GST goods such as motor spirit, high speed diesel have been kept out of purview of this computation.
 
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