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 TREATMENT OF VARIOUS AFFORDABLE HOUSING SCHEMES POST 01.04.2019 PART-6:-

GST UPDATE ON TREATMENT OF VARIOUS AFFORDABLE HOUSING SCHEMES POST 01.04.2019 PART-6:-

GST UPDATE ON TREATMENT OF VARIOUS AFFORDABLE HOUSING SCHEMES POST 01.04.2019 PART-6:-
 
In earlier update, we have discussed about the GST rates on various affordable housing schemes post implementation of new scheme for real estate sector w.e.f. 01.04.2019. It was concluded that only the ongoing projects covered under various schemes of affordable housing such as credit linked subsidy scheme for EWS/LIG, Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission of Rajiv Awas Yojana etc. will be considered as ‘affordable residential apartment’ liable to GST rate of 1%. The new projects will be eligible to concessional GST rate of 1% only if the criteria of 60/90 sq meters + Rs. 45 Lakhs is satisfied. If the criteria is not satisfied, the projects commenced on or after 01.04.2019, even if covered under various affordable schemes would be liable to GST rate of 5% applicable for “construction of apartments other than affordable residential apartments”. In the present update, we will discuss certain other issues such as what will be the GST rate applicable for contractors providing construction services to the promoter in above cases and the amended entries at serial no. 3(iv), 3(v) and 3(vi) of the notification no. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017.
 
The answer to the question regarding the rate of GST applicable to the contractor providing services to the developer with respect to affordable residential apartments lies in entry 3 (va) inserted vide Notification No. 03/2019-Central Tax (Rate) dated 29.03.2019. The said entry states that composite supply of works contract by way of construction/renovation/alteration of affordable residential apartments for which promoter has not opted to pay GST at old rates will be liable to GST at the rate of 12%. However, the condition required to be satisfied for availing concessional rate of 12% is that the carpet area of affordable residential apartments should not be less than 50% of the total carpet area of all the apartments in the project. Moreover, if it is found that the condition of carpet area of 50% affordable residential apartments is not satisfied, the promoter will be liable to pay the differential GST under reverse charge mechanism as if the applicable GST rate was 18%. This will again be hardship for the promoters as the sub-contractor with respect to affordable residential apartments would charge GST at the rate of 12% whereas the GST payable by the promoter on such affordable residential apartments is 1% to be paid in cash. Furthermore, on violation of the condition as regards 50% carpet area for affordable residential apartments, the differential GST would be payable by the builder under reverse charge mechanism in cash thereby ensuring that the concessional GST rate of 12% is applicable only if the contractor provides services with respect to affordable residential apartments constituting at least 50% of the total carpet area of the project.
 
Now, coming to the another aspect regarding amendment made in the entries 3(iv), 3(v) and 3(vi) of the Notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017. We submit that the opening paragraph of the above entries has been amended to read as follows:-
Serial No. Description of services CGST
Rate
3(iv) Composite supply of works contract as defined in clause (119) of section 2 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 other than that covered by items (i), (ia), (ib), (ic), (id), (ie) and (if) above, supplied by way of construction, erection, commissioning, installation, completion, fitting out, repair, maintenance, renovation, or alteration of,-
(a) .......................
(b) a civil structure or any other original works pertaining to a scheme under Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission of Rajiv Awas Yojana;
(c) ....................
6
3(v) Composite supply of works contract as defined in clause (119) of section 2 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 other than that covered by items (i), (ia), (ib), (ic), (id), (ie) and (if) above,, supplied by way of construction, erection, commissioning, or installation of original works pertaining to,-
(a)................
(b) a single residential unit otherwise than as a part of a residential complex;
(c)................
6
3(vi) Composite supply of works contract as defined in clause (119) of section 2 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 other than that covered by items (i), (ia), (ib), (ic), (id), (ie) and (if) above,, provided to the Central Government, State Government, Union Territory, a local authority, a Governmental Authority or a Government Entity by way of construction, erection, commissioning, installation, completion, fitting out, repair, maintenance, renovation, or alteration of –
  1. ...................
  2. .........................
(c) a residential complex predominantly meant for self-use or the use of their employees or other persons specified in paragraph 3 of the Schedule III of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
6
   
If we analyse the simultaneous impact of all amended entries of notification no. 03/2019-Central Tax (Rate) dated 29.03.2019, it is found that entries 3(i), (ia), (ib), (ic), (id), (ie) and (if) all pertain to construction of complex, building, civil structure or part thereof, including 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. However, the entries 3(iv), 3(v), 3(va) and 3(vi) pertain to composite supply of works contract for construction, erection, commissioning, installation, completion, fitting out, repair, maintenance, renovation or alteration. Therefore, there is difference in the said entries. Consequently, the entries 3(iv), 3(v), 3(va) and 3(vi) contain phrase “other than that covered by items (i), (ia), (ib), (ic), (id), (ie) and (if) above”. However, in our opinion, the entries 3(iv), 3(v) and 3(va) have been kept intact as these prescribe GST rate for the contractors supplying works contract services in relation to construction/renovation of residential apartments. It is found that the government has provided same GST rates for contractor providing works contract services pertaining to various schemes and the affordable residential apartments as 12%. However, the concessional GST rate of 12% is subject to condition that 50% of the carpet area pertains to affordable residential apartments whereas there is no such condition with respect to projects covered under other schemes. This surely creates discrimination as regards works contract services provided by the contractor with respect to various other housing schemes because concessional GST rate of 12% applies without any condition. It is also worth observing that the new projects started on or after 01.04.2019 under the aforesaid housing schemes are not considered as ‘affordable residential apartments’ but still the contractors would enjoy unconditional concessional GST rate of 12% on such projects.   
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