Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + AAR GST - 2021 (10) TMI AAR This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (10) TMI 368 - AAR - GSTLevy of GST - Supply or not - leasing services - contribution paid/payable by the members towards Development Cost of the Bourse for the promotion of Exports of Gem and Jewellery - exemption under Entry No.41(Heading 9972) of Notification No.12/2017Central Tax(Rate) dated 28-6-2017 or not - liability of interest if the liability to pay tax shall accrue with retrospective effect from 1st July, 2017 - HELD THAT:- On careful reading of the copies of the two deeds entered between GHB and GIDC, it is forthcoming that the deeds pertain to leasing of subject plots by GIDC to GHB for a period of 99 years and it is not sale of land. GHB’s contention that it has paid stamp duty on lease deed does not change the scope of supply of service into sale of land. The supply is Leasing services in present case. The procedure of registration of purchase of land and applicable stamp duties is different from the procedure of lease of land. Further, it is noted that GHB is aware of this fact that subject activity is leasing service because GHB itself argues for the applicability of entry 41 to said Notification, wherein the description of services is long term leasing of plots for thirty years or more. Subject entry 41 to said Notification provides exemption for providing said services by GIDC to GHB (developer). In this regard, there are no merit in the contention of GHB, that GIDC has supplied services to industrial units, such as M/s. P. Hirani Exports LLP and M/s. Sonani Jewels Pvt. Ltd. for it is on record that GIDC has provided subject services to GHB and not to industrial units. It is also on record that GHB has supplied subject leasing services to industrial units such as M/s. P. Hirani Exports LLP and M/s. Sonani Jewels Pvt. Ltd. Now that GHB is not a State Government Industrial Development Corporations or Undertakings, also that GHB is not having 50 per cent. or more ownership of Central Government, State Government, Union territory, there are no merit to extend the scope of exemption granted vide Entry No. 41 to the said Notification to consideration received by GHB. GHB acquired the lease of the plot from GIDC at the cost of ₹ 225 per Sqm whereas GHB leased the plot to the members, such as, M/s. P. Hirani Exports at the cost of ₹ 2712.83 per Sqm and to M/s. Soni Jewels at ₹ 11960 per Sqm. It is on record that this amount recovered by GHB from its members is not in the nature of reimbursement of charges of the amount which GHB paid to GIDC as GHB has recovered the charges from its applicants/members over and above the rate which it paid to GIDC. Thus there are no merit to entertain the entry 77 of said Notification to GHB. The competent authority, has laid down this path to exemption vide said entry 77 to said Notification to GHB in this regard, which has not been satisfied by GHB. Liability of interest - HELD THAT:- There are no explicit mention in the statutory provisions that Question on interest applicability may be raised before the Authority. However, the authority do not want to pass a Ruling without a comment on this issue. The liability to interest is automatic and arises by the operation of the statutory and mandatory provisions of the law. The interest liability is a statutory liability which accrues automatically.
|