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 TREATMENT OF JOINT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS - PART II

GST UPDATE ON TREATMENT OF JOINT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS - PART II


In the previous update we canvassed the taxability of joint development agreements under GST Regime. Through this update we would like to enumerate the provisions concerning the time of supply and the valuation of service in respect to the joint development agreements.
It is pertinent to mention that there is no express provision as regards joint development agreements. Consequently, the time of supply will be ascertained on the basis of most appropriate clause. As per section 12(2) of the CGST Act, 2017, the time of supply of goods shall be the earlier of the following:-
• Date of issue of invoice by the supplier or the last date on which he is required to issue of invoice for supply, or
• Date on which the supplier receives payment with respect to the supply.
As no invoice is issued by the developer to the land owner, and it is also obvious that the development rights are transferred to the developer before the developer starts construction, it can be inferred that the consideration is received by the developer in kind even before commencement of construction. Consequently, one may opine that developer is required to pay GST on the flats agreed to be given to the land owner even prior to commencement of construction which will prove to be a great hardship for the developers.
Now, comes the valuation aspect, which is given under section 15 of the CGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 27 to 35 of CGST Rules, 2017. It is pertinent to mention that there is no explicit provision as regards the valuation of flats given to land owner under joint development agreement. Consequently, the most appropriate Rule is to be applied. Rule 27 of the CGST Rules, 2017 states that where the value of supply of goods or services is for a consideration not wholly in money, the value of supply shall be the open market value of such supply. If the open market value is not available, it will be determined as total consideration received in money or its equivalent. If value cannot be determined by this formulae, it will be the value of supply of like goods/services.
As per the above provisions, the value of flats given to land owner shall be open market value being the value of flats on the date of transfer of joint development rights. Say for example, on the date of transfer of joint development rights, developer sold 10 flats at the rate of Rs. 30,00,000/- then the value of flats to be given to the land owner will be valued at Rs. 30,00,000/-.
However, if the open market value is not available, the value of flats shall be the value of flats of like kind and quality at about the same time. Say for example, the value of flat in the region of the same specification is 32,00,000/- then the value of flats given to land owner will be valued at Rs. 32,00,000/-.
If we compare the provisions of valuation of the flats given to the land owner under joint development agreements in the service tax laws, it is found that the provision is similar to the present regime. Under Service Tax Laws, as per circular no. 151/2/2012-ST dated 10.02.2017, the valuation of flats given to land owner shall be equal to the value of similar flats charged by the developer from prospective buyers of flats and this concept is similar to the concept of open market value. Furthermore, CBEC Instruction No. 354/311/2015-TRU dated 20.01.2016 states that for valuation of flats given to land owner, clarification of education guide that valuation shall be the value of land on date of transfer to the developer is not proper. The instruction states that for the purpose of valuation of flats given to land owner, provisions of Circular No. 151/2/2012-ST dated 10.02.2017 would prevail. Hence, under the GST regime, similar provision is continued with the exception that the time of supply arrives at the date of transfer of development rights to the developer by the land owner. This will be great hardship to the developer as entire GST would be payable in the beginning as against payment of tax on periodical basis.
Further, the builder is liable to pay GST on the owner's share of the flats/houses/portion of the building constructed by the builder/developer and given to the land owner as per the development agreement. The issue to be dealt here is what shall be the taxable value. As per decisions taken in 14th Meeting of the GST Council held on May 18-19, 2017 in Srinagar, J&K; 18 sectoral groups have been constituted representing various sectors of the economy in order to ensure smooth roll-out of GST. One such sectoral group is "MEDIA & ENTERTAINMENT SECTORAL GROUP" which has issued some FAQs on GST in respect of Construction of Residential Complex by Builders/Developers. In these FAQs, following clarification has been given in respect of land owner's share of the flats/houses through FAQs:-
GST is liable to be paid by the builder/developer on the share of the land owner, also. GST is liable to be paid when the possession or right in the property of the said flats are transferred to the land owner by entering into a 'conveyance deed' or similar instrument (e.g. allotment letter).
The value of the flats/portion of the building‟ supplied to the land owner by the developer/builder has to be determined under the provisions of Section 15 of the CGST Act, 2017 read with Rules governing Valuation as envisaged under Rules 27 to 35 of the CGST Rules, 2017.
In terms of Rule 27 of CGST Rules, 2017, where the supply of goods or services is for a consideration not wholly in money, the value of the supply shall:
(a) be the open market value of such supply;
(b) if the open market value is not available under clause (a), be the sum total of consideration in money and any such further amount in money as is equivalent to the consideration not in money, if such amount is known at the time of supply;
(c) if the value of supply is not determinable under clause (a) or clause (b), be the value of supply of goods or services or both of like kind and quality;
In view of the above provisions, the value of supply of those flats would be equal to the value of similar flats charged by the builder/developer from the buyers of his share of flats. In case the prices of flats/houses undergo a change over the period of sale (from the first sale of flat/house in the residential complex to the last sale of the flat/house), the value of similar flats as are sold nearer to the date on which land is being made available for construction should be used for arriving at the value for the purpose of tax."
Therefore, the above clarification given by the media and entertainment sectoral group are of great help in determining the taxability of flats sold to land owner. Though these FAQs don't have any legal binding, yet since there is no clarification on these points, these FAQs will act as guiding factor to the assessees.

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

The content of this GST update is for educational purpose only and not intended for solicitation.

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