HC strikes down GST demand on TDR used by real estate developer
Nagpur: In an important ruling for Maharashtra's real estate sector, the Nagpur bench of Bombay high court set aside a GST demand issued to a city-based developer, holding that no taxable transfer of development rights occurred under the agreement in question. The decision offers clarity on the tax implications of development agreements in the real estate sector.
The division bench of justices Avinash Gharote and Abhay Mantri delivered the ruling while allowing a petition filed by Shrinivasa Realcon, which challenged a show-cause notice issued on August 14, 2024, and a consequent GST order dated December 10, 2024. The demand pertained to a development agreement executed on April 7, 2022, for constructing a residential complex on an 8,000 sq ft plot at mouza Lendra. The developer was appointed by the landowner for a consideration of Rs7 crore and two flats.
Senior counsel Akshay Naik, assisted by Abhishek Bhoot, argued that the project did not involve any transfer or purchase of development rights or floor space index (FSI) from external sources. Instead, the construction was based solely on the existing FSI or any statutory increase.
Entry 5B of the GST notification dated June 28, 2017, amended on March 29, 2019, allows taxation of services involving the transfer of TDR or FSI for construction purposes. However, the court noted the GST law does not define a 'transfer of development right'. It referred to Clause 11.2 of the Unified Development Control and Promotion Regulations, which outlines TDR as compensation in FSI granted by a planning authority, not applicable in the present case.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Trending in in 2025: Local network access control [Click Here]
Esseps
Learn More
Undo
The bench concluded that the development agreement lacked any reference to the transfer of such rights and rejected the department's reliance on Clause 18 of the contract, which merely required compliance under the Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act, 1970.
Declaring the transaction outside the purview of Entry 5B, the court quashed both the show-cause notice and the final order. "The transaction contemplated does not fall within Entry 5B of the notification of June 28, 2017, as amended by another notification of March 29, 2019. Neither the show-cause notice nor the consequent order can be sustained," the judges stated in their order, thereby setting them aside.
Key takeaways from HC verdict:
- There was no actual trading of transfer of development rights (TDR) in the agreement
- Entry 5B of GST notification could not be invoked in case
- GST Act does not define 'transfer of development rights'
- Developer used existing FSI or statutory increase, not external TDR
- Clause 18 of agreement was not proof of transfer
- Set aside both show-cause notice and final tax order
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
DGGI dropping Infosys case signals new approach in granting tax benefit to software exporters
New Delhi: The move by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence to (DGGI) close ₹32,403-crore of pre-tax proceedings against Infosys Ltd last week goes beyond the simple resolution of a tax dispute. It signals the government's acceptance of the fact that business processes by software companies need not necessarily be organized in a way that is convenient for the tax administration, according to two people familiar with the development. The closure of the case, based on a clarification issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) last June and verification of Infosys' transactions for the past five years, is significant as it changes the way GST authorities will examine the transactions of software companies. Read more: GST mop-up: The signals for India's economy & taxes It allows officials to look at Indian tech businesses making use of offshore branches for exporting services from India at the broadest level and conclude that the offshore branches' services to the parent are not taxable because the parent can claim credit for any tax paid on it or claim a refund for it, explained one of the persons quoted above. Credits claimed for the taxes paid on import of service can be utilized for settling any domestic tax liability of the IT company. Credit or refund is offered for these taxes because, the value of the service imported from the offshore branch is included in the total software services exported from India. Most countries refund indirect taxes like GST on goods or services used in exported products or services in order to keep exports competitive. For India, this is a big departure from the practice followed till now, which requires software exporters like Infosys, which operate through foreign branches, to first raise an invoice on itself for the services rendered by the overseas branch which contributes to the overall export value from India, pay Integrated GST (IGST) on it, and then either claim a refund or tax credits which can be used to set off the parent's domestic GST liability, added the person. Other large software exporters in India have been doing meticulous paperwork to ensure that they either get tax credit or a refund, making the exports tax exempt. Hence other large software exporters did not encounter the tax complication Infosys ran into, explained the person. However, the new approach benefits them too, said the person. If any of these firms following this model of exporting software using services of overseas branches, have any inadvertent problems in their paperwork, the 26 June 2024 circular—on the basis of which the Infosys case has been resolved—will have them covered too, explained the person. The clarification had said that in such cases, the value of services 'imported' by the Indian parent for its overall exports, will be deemed as zero. The DGGI decision closing the tax proceedings on Infosys Ltd. is a welcome move, said M.S. Mani, partner indirect taxes, Deloitte India. 'Ensuring that field staff do not initiate tax proceedings without a sound basis and resolving any pending disputes quickly where clarifications are issued by the government are crucial for fostering investor confidence," said Mani. Does this clarification cover smaller exporters? In order to have an export business and have overseas branch operations, the exporter typically needs to be at least the size of a medium enterprise. If they follow this model of using foreign branches for exports, the CBIC circular will benefit them as well. However, this does not apply when the overseas operations are organized as a subsidiary of the Indian parent, rather than a branch office. Why Infosys encountered the tax notice The way some of the wordings in GST provisions are enacted by Parliament requires field officers to strictly look at specific transactions in certain cases and does not afford a bird's eye view, and this at times comes in the way of implementing the spirit of the law, said the person. Read more: Small businesses bleed cash as GST kicks in before payments To resolve the case, DGGI was required to verify the company's transactions for the preceding five years, a process that started towards the end of last year and took a few months to complete. The pre-tax notice was issued to the company to keep the case alive till it was resolved. Mint had reported on 3 August last year that, in a move that could bring early closure to a potentially damaging tax litigation, the Central government was likely to accept Infosys' plea that GST does not apply to the services it avails from its offshore branch offices. Why paperwork poses a problem For company to raise an invoice to itself for the services of overseas branches, pay tax on it and claim credit or refund, certain timelines have to be met. This adds to additional compliance obligations. Technology and IT services industry body Nasscom said in response to a query from Mint that the government has been proactively engaged on this issue, with a clear intent to enable ease of doing business and provide greater tax certainty. The industry body's observations are purely from an industry perspective, and not company specific. 'A fundamental design of the GST regime is that exports are zero-rated, treating a head office and its branch as distinct persons has introduced avoidable complexity," said Ashish Aggarwal, vice president, Government Policy and Engagements. While this distinction may serve domestic revenue-sharing between states, its extension to international transactions has spawned litigation, as authorities scrutinize every flow involving an Indian-headquartered IT company, its overseas branch, and the foreign client, Aggarwal said. In all cases, the Indian company has a master agreement with the overseas client and export earnings are realized in foreign exchange in accordance with RBI's Foreign Exchange Management Act regulations," Aggarwal added. 'IT-ITES companies have adopted various operational structures and billing methodologies to optimize service delivery abroad, but the substance and economic reality remain unchanged. Whether billing directly to the client or via a branch office, the underlying service, value creation and economic benefit are identical; taxability must therefore follow substance, not form, to honour legislative intent and ease business. We have engaged constructively with government—presenting prevalent billing models—and urged a holistic resolution to end both past and future disputes," said Aggarwal. Read more: Govt relaxes rules to boost GST registration among small businesses While the Infosys case has been closed early, tax experts said that, in general, if businesses proactively challenge the tax issues they face, it will help to bring legal clarity. Abhishek A. Rastogi, founder of Rastogi Chambers, Tax and constitutional expert said, 'When a manifestly arbitrary tax notice is issued, irrespective of the amount involved, its absurdity should be challenged in court so that the correct procedure is established and the industry at large will benefit." Queries emailed on Monday to the finance ministry and to Infosys seeking comments for the story remained unanswered at the time of publishing.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Shadow supply chain and missing E-way bills: How this pan masala manufacturer evaded GST
Gurgaon: A firm manufacturing pan masala and tobacco products for prominent brands allegedly evaded tax up to Rs 5 crore by running a shadow supply chain that operated out of illegal warehouses along the Delhi-Faridabad border. Officials of the Central GST office said the firm transported finished products from its registered manufacturing unit in Delhi to illegal warehouses in Faridabad. From these sites, goods were transported across Delhi-NCR by truckers without any E-way bills. An 'E-way bill' is a mandatory GST document that is to be carried by whosoever is transporting a good or delivering a service. Since there was no official record of these goods, the company bypassed any tax obligations on them. A CGST Faridabad official told TOI on Monday that they received intelligence about the fraud, and on June 7 and 8, they conducted simultaneous raids at five spots. This included four unregistered properties linked to the firm in Faridabad, and an official facility in Delhi. "The four warehouses were storing unaccounted goods of major brands such as Shikhar, Tansen, Kamla Pasand, Swagat Gold, SS One, Hans and Double Black. Searches were carried out at the Delhi facility of the company, where we found a stock mismatch of goods too," the official said. He added that the raids were carried out in coordination with the CGST Delhi (East) unit as one of the facilities was under its jurisdiction. After the raids, a CGST team intercepted a truck in Faridabad, close to the border, and uncovered 6.3 lakh packets of pan masala valued at Rs 25 lakh. The trucker did not possess any E-way bill. The official said that unregistered warehouses were close to the Delhi border to make it convenient to divert unaccounted goods from the main facility in the capital. "This case highlights growing sophistication in tax evasion schemes and efficacy of data analytics in detecting such frauds," the joint commissioner of CGST Faridabad said. He added that the department is investigating and will initiate legal proceedings against the manufacturer. The company could not be reached for comment till Monday night. This isn't the first time that the firm has come under CGST scanner. Last year, CGST teams raided two of the company's facilities in Uttar Pradesh's Sahibabad and Bulandshahr industrial areas for alleged tax evasion. At the time, officials had estimated GST evasion of Rs 1.8 crore. Then too, the firm manufacturing pan masala and tobacco products for prominent brands had allegedly stored unaccounted goods.
The Print
3 hours ago
- The Print
CBI arrests UP CGST superintendent in bribery case
CGST superintendent Nishan Singh Malli had allegedly issued penalty notice to a businessman, who controls the private company, on account of non-filing of GST returns. The other person arrested by the agency is a tax lawyer who was representing the complainant in the case, they said. New Delhi, Jun 9 (PTI) The CBI has arrested two persons, including a superintendent of Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) in Uttar Pradesh, while allegedly accepting bribe of Rs 1 lakh for waiving off penalty on a private company, officials said Monday. Malli, who is posted at Gajrola with additional charge of Amroha in UP, demanded Rs 4 lakh in collusion with tax lawyer Amit Khandelwal from the businessman for waiving off penalty on his company, they said. 'The tax advocate was representing the complainant. However, he entered into a conspiracy with superintendent, CGST, Amroha and pressured the complainant to deliver the demand of undue advantage of Rs 4 lakh to the accused superintendent,' a CBI spokesperson said. The businessman approached the CBI with a complaint expressing unwillingness to pay the bribe, the spokesperson said in a statement. The agency laid a trap during which the superintendent and the advocate were arrested red handed taking Rs 1 lakh as the first instalment of the total Rs 4 lakh demanded as bribe, the statement said. PTI ABS KVK KVK This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
