Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Dept. Can’t Classify Product as Zarda Scented Tobacco After Repeatedly Approving It As Chewing Tobacco: CESTAT *  Mere Uploading Of GST Order On Portal Is Not “Valid” Service: Tripura HC *  CGST Can Proceed Even If SGST Closed Similar Case Earlier: Delhi HC *  SC upholds 28% GST on online gaming with retrospective effect. *  West Bengal Govt cuts E-way Bill Threshold limit to Rs. 50,000 for intra-state goods movement. *  Criminal Prosecution Under Central Excise Act Can’t Continue After CESTAT Sets Aside Duty Demand on Merits: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Orders for Denial of Personal Hearing; Remands Matter Subject to 10% Deposit *  Ex Parte GST Order: Madras High Court Directs Immediate Removal of Bank/ITC Attachment Upon 25% Deposit *  J.K. Cement Receives GST Demand Order of Rs 8,02,113/- from Ahmedabad Tax Authority *  Delhi Police EOW Busts Alleged Rs. 128 Crore GST Fake Invoice Network. *  REPLY TO SCN CAN’T BE TREATED AS “EMPTY FORMALITY”: ORISSA HIGH COURT QUASHES GST DEMAND OF RS. 57.30 LAKH *  Challenge to CGST Provisions restricting ITC to Bonafide Purchasers : Allahabad HC issues notice *  CBIC Notifies Revised Customs Tariff Values for Edible Oils, Gold, Silver, Brass Scrap and Areca Nuts *  Delhi HC Orders Removal of GST Attachment After Statutory 1 Year Period Expired *  GSTAT Extends Relaxed Appeal Filing Guidelines till December 31, 2026 *  AO fails to Provide Import - Export Data from DGFT to Taxpayer for Reconciliation *  Gold, Silver Imports To Get Costlier As Govt Raises Customs Duty To 10%  *  GSTAT Enables Pre-Payment Access to Document Upload and Checklist for GST Appeal Filing *  GST Portal Restrictions Can’t Override Statute: Gujarat HC Allows Cross-State Transfer Of CGST ITC After Amalgamation *  Centre Revises HS Codes for Large Diameter Steel Pipes Used in Oil & Gas Pipelines *  Customs Duty Liability Arises On Warehouse Clearance Date: Supreme Court *  Government lifts export ban on de-oiled rice bran *  CESTAT Grants 12% Interest on Pre-Deposit for Investigation from Date of Deposit till Refund and Denies Interest on Interest. *  Government Overhauls GST Classification Framework for Non-Alcoholic Beverages; Fruit Juice Drinks, Milk-Based Beverages and Caffeinated Drinks to Attract Revised 5% and 40% GST Rates from May 1, 2026 *  India’s gross GST collections hit a record Rs 2.42 lakh crore in April, up 8.7% *  Customs clearance stalled, revenue hit over MRP dispute *  Shipping Corporation explores Middle East routes as Hormuz tensions disrupt cargo movement *  India, Kenya signs MoU for exchange of pre-arrival customs information *  No demand of Taxes under Reverse Charge if Tax Already Discharged by Service Provider under forward charge *  The India-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement, signed "once-in-a-generation" deal that eliminates tariffs on 100% of Indian exports to New Zealand
Subject News *  Consignment Sales Can’t Be Reclassified as Inter-State Sales Based on Pre-Agreement Evidence: CESTAT *  Exporter Can’t Be Denied Advance Authorization Benefit Due To ICEGATE Technical Glitch: Delhi High Court *  No GST Demand For Mere Wrong Set-Off Of IGST Credit Under CGST And SGST Heads: Kerala HC. *  Cenvat Credit Can’t Be Denied on Input Services Having Nexus With Manufacturing Activities: CESTAT *  Pending Proceedings Can’t Survive Without Saving Clause: Calcutta High Court Quashes GST Demand of Rs. 6.28 Crore After Omission of Rule 96(10) *  Madras HC Quashes GST Demands on TASMAC (Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation) Bar Licence Fee *  GST Proceedings Cannot Survive Omitted Rule Without Saving Clause: Calcutta HC *  Provisional Release Can’t Be Denied Solely On Dept. Suspicion Of Misclassification And Undervaluation Of Imported Goods: CESTAT *  Businesses Should Not Be Kept Outside GST Regime Without Due Process: Gauhati High Court *  Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Reconsideration of Contractors’ Claim for Additional GST Payment After Tax Rate Hike From 12% to 18% *  S. 108 Statements Can’t Be Sole Basis Without Following Section 138B Procedure: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Frames Key Questions on Mandatory Distribution of ITC U/s 20 CGST Act *  Filing of Annexure-B for Refund Applications involving Accumulated ITC using the offline utility in GST portal: GSTN *  No Service Tax on Parent Company’s Un-Invoiced Cost Allocations Without Actual Service or Consideration: CESTAT  *  Calcutta High Court Upholds GST Classification of Polypropylene Leno Bags as Plastic Products *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  GSTAT Issues Major Bench Allocation Framework; All Appeals to First Go Before Division Bench *  ITC Blocking Without Reasoned Order Violates Rule 86A; Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Release of Credit *  Allahabad HC Refuses Bail to CGST Superintendent In Rs. 70 Lakh Bribery Case *  S.130 Can’t Be Invoked Without Prior Tax Determination U/s 73/74: Allahabad High Court Quashes GST Confiscation Proceedings *  SC grants Bail to Rs 54cr GST case  *  Karnataka HC Sets Aside Duplicate GST Orders, Orders Fresh Hearing on GSTIN Cancellation *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  Transfer Of Unutilized ITC After Amalgamation - Supreme Court Issues Notice *  PUNJAB & HARYANA HC QUASHES GST CANCELLATION NOTICE FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE CBIC ENQUIRY REPORT *  LICENSE FEE, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CHARGES NOT INCLUDIBLE IN CUSTOMS VALUE UNLESS THEY ARE A CONDITION OF SALE: CESTAT *  DELHI HC ORDERS REMOVAL OF GST ATTACHMENT AFTER STATUTORY 1 YEAR PERIOD EXPIRED *  CUSTOMS BROKER CAN’T BE FAULTED JUST BECAUSE EXPORTER’S GST REGISTRATION WAS PREVIOUSLY CANCELLED: CESTAT   *  Supreme Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Delhi HC Ruling Holding Real Operator Behind Fake GST Firms Liable As ‘Taxable Person  *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected Merely Because DRC-07 Was Not Uploaded On Portal: Bombay High Court  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST UPDATE ON TAXABILITY OF CHARGES COLLECTED BY HOUSING SOCIETY 158/2020-21

GST UPDATE ON TAXABILITY OF CHARGES COLLECTED BY HOUSING SOCIETY 158/2020-21
The determination of taxability on cooperative housing society is always a disputed point and there are many contradictory verdicts by AAR. This update seeks to discuss a recent ruling by AAAR Maharashtra in the case of M/S APSARA CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED wherein the issue raised was whether the charges collected by the society amounts to supply and liable to GST and whether they are correctly discharging the GST liability for which illustrative invoices were being provided.
Appellant contended that the charges are not liable to GST in view of Supreme Court decision given in the case of Calcutta Club wherein it was held that services provided by incorporated clubs to its members is not liable to tax. The appellant contended that they are not carrying out any business in terms of section 2(17) of CGST Act, 2017, and hence their activities cannot be considered as “Supply”, as per under Section 7(1) of the CGST Act, 2017. Further, it was contended that society charges levied on the members is merely a contribution towards the collective maintenance and upkeep of the Society and cannot be considered as ‘consideration’ defined in Section 2(31) of the CGST Act, 2017 as no profit is being derived from these contributions. Reference has also been made to the decisions of Maharashtra Advance Ruling in the case of M/s Lions Club of Poona Kothurd and M/s Rotary Club of Mumbai Western Elite,wherein it was held thatif the society charges are meant towards meeting the administrative expenses of the society, the said society charges would not be construed as “consideration”. Accordingly, the society charges would not attract GST. The Appellant also referred the following Hon’ble High Court judgements to contend that the activities carried out by them would not amount to “Supply”, and hence the charges are not liable to GST:   
 
  1. Saturday Club Limited Vs. Asstt. Commissioner, Service Tax Cell, Calcutta & Ors. (2005) 180 ELT 437 (Cal HC).
  2. Sports Club of Gujarat Limited Vs. Union of India (2010) 35 VST 375 (Gujarat HC).
 
The Department has argued that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of West Bengal & Ors. Vs. Calcutta Club Limited, wherein pertains to sales tax regime and that time concept of the term “Supply” was not prevalent. Therefore, the Apex Court Judgement will not be applicable. Reference was made to the term “business” as provide under section 2(17) of CGST Act, 2017 and ‘supply’ under section 7 of the CGST Act which have wider connotation.
After considering the submissions, Maharashtra AAAR has observed that the activities carried out by appellant is to be considered as supply in terms of Section 7(1)(a) of the CGST Act, 2017, and the same would be liable for GST subject to the condition that the monthly subscription/contribution charged by the society from its members is more than Rs 7,500 per month per member and the annual aggregate turnover of the society by way of supplying of services and goods is also Rs 20 lakh or more. It was held that the definition of the term business and supply are very wide and cover all clubs, whether incorporated or not thereby nullifying the concept of mutuality as was prevalent in erstwhile regime. As regards the issue raised for correctness of GST liability discharged, the AAAR conceded with AAR that they can only comment on determination of tax liability but not on the methodology adopted for discharging tax liability. As the second issue was outside the purview of AAR, the same was not answered.
 
This decision seeks to distinguish the ratio laid down by various High Courts and the Apex Court in the erstwhile indirect taxation regime concluding that services provided by incorporated club to its members is not liable to tax as club and members are not to be treated as separate entities due to application of principle of mutuality. However, the said analogy seems to be fade in GST era as the definition of supply, service and business are wide enough to cover services provided by incorporated/unincorporated club to its members. Therefore, the clubs will definitely face hard time to apply the benefit of decisions rendered in erstwhile regime in the GST era. AAR rulings are not even following the ratio laid down by Apex Court and High Courts. Let us wait for another round of litigation till Apex court when the matter is finally decided.

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   and u may also follow us on Linkedin  https://www.linkedin.com/in/ca-pradeep-jain-b6a31a16

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