News Update

Saudi Arabia imposes temporary visa ban on 14 countries, including PakistanUK protests against Israel detaining two British lawmakersGovt to set up dedicated startup India desk for budding entrepreneursDelhi Govt takes stern action against steep fee hike by private schoolsUK MP Dan Norris arrested for alleged child sex offencesIndian-American country judge nabbed on money-laundering chargesAustralia pledges 2.3 bn Australian dollar to enable households buy solar batteriesIndia, Lanka sign MoU on defence cooperationCX - Mere interconnection under Income Tax law does not establish a related party transaction under Central Excise law, thereby invalidating department's demand for duty at 110% of production cost: CESTATOwaisi moves SC against Waqf Amendment ActNo TDS to be deducted u/s 194EE on payments u/s 80CCAST - Removal of smart cards for pairing with set-top boxes (STBs) constituted job work under Rule 4(5)(a) of CCR, 2004 and thus, reversal of CENVAT credit is not required: CESTATCBIC issues AGT orders of 229 Jcs / ADCs + 308 ACs / DCs + 177 Pr Commissioners / Commissioners + 12 Pr CCs & CCsST - Activity of serving as intermediary between foreign entities & Indian customers, qualifies as export of services; commissions earned by assessee will not attract Service Tax levy: CESTATKessler Syndrome: Over 1200 objects of space debris banged into earth in 2024CX - Valuation - Specifications meant for guidance purposes per se differ from detailed engineering drawings; only the latter is to be included in assessable value: CESTATTrump grants another 75-day to TikTok to find Chinese buyerEU fears Trump beer tariffs may cost one lakh jobsTrump tosses out National Security Agency DirectorBudget Session of Parliament adjourns sine-die; 16 Bills passedHamas says Israeli offensive in Gaza is fatal for hostagesEuropean Commission votes to freeze existing sustainability rules to compete with China and USParliament passes Protection of Interest in Aircraft Objects Bill, 2025US economy adds 2.28 lakh jobs in March monthI-T - Provisions of section 50C are equally applicable to asset forming block of asset as well: ITATChina retaliates; imposes 34% tariffs on American goods
 
Reduction in GST rates for Realty Sector - missing the basic math

 

FEBRUARY 28, 2019

By S Sivakumar, LL.B., FCA, FCS, ACSI, Advocate, K Vidhyashree, B Com., LLB., Advocate & R Vaidyanathan, M.Com., M.Phil., GST Practitioner

THE GST Council, in its 33 rd Meeting held on 24 th February, 2019 has recommended that the GST rate for non-affordable housing would be reduced to 5% without ITC, while the GST rate for affordable housing would be reduced to 1%, with effect from April 1, 2019. In the press release issued on February 24, 2019, the Government has justified this proposed reduction in the GST rates as a boost for the residential realty sector.

Be that as it may... it would seem that this proposal is bound to drastically affect the residential realty sector.

The Input Tax Credit ('ITC') that is borne by the Developer would easily work out to about 9 to 10%of the selling price. The main reason for this rather high ITC is mainly due to cement being taxed at a GST rate of 28%. Elevators and certain other costly items also get charged at 18% GST, apart from services being charged at the GST rate of 18%. At the existing GST rate of 12% (on the construction value + land value), the Developer would be able to completely recoup his ITC. Since the Developer is allowed to avail of ITC on most inward supplies [except for certain small-time restrictions contained in Section 17(5)], the Developer is only too happy to see that his ITC is fully covered by the output GST charged to his flat buyer, under the current regime. When the output GST rate for the non-affordable residential segment is reduced to 5% without ITC, it would mean that the Developer would lose the entirely ITC, resulting in an incremental loss of margin to the tune of about 5 to 6%.

The question that would arise is whether the Developer would be entitled to increase his basic prices by5% to 6% to cover himself for the loss of ITC? Is there anything in the GST law that would prevent the Developer to cover himself for the loss that he would suffer, on account of loss of ITC. My view, by way of a reiteration, is that, the Developer would indeed be entitled to increase his basic price to cover himself for the loss of ITC, as anti-profiteering provisions contained in Section 171 are inapplicable here. Of course, if the Developer is indeed allowed to increase his basic price, one would wonder as to the very purpose of the proposed reduction in the GST rate.

Taking this discussion forward......whether the proposed reduction in the GST rate would be applied even for running contracts, wherein, the Developer has already charged and collected GST @ 12% for the period prior to April 1, 2019? In my strong view, if the Government prescribes that the rate reduction should also apply to running contracts as of April 1, 2019, we are sure to have chaos all around. Issues related to ITC including its reversal, etc. are bound to create major issues. Hence, one does hope that the Government implements the new scheme only for contracts to be signed on or after April 1, 2019.

Another issue that would be relevant is whether, it would be compulsory for Developers to implement the new scheme with effect from April 1,2019? In my view, the Government should offer the new scheme as an alternative to the existing scheme of charging GST @ 12% after claiming ITC. Making it compulsory for Developers to implement the scheme could face constitutional challenges, for sure, as this would go against the concept of seamless credit which is at the heart of the GST regime.

Another issue is whether, the Developer would be free to choose the new scheme of lower GST rates without ITC for some projects and the regular scheme of higher GST rates with ITC for some other projects? In my view, the Government should ensure that the Developer is given the freedom to choose the scheme that he finds appropriate.

Yet another issue that would bother Developers is the unutilized ITC carried by them including the transitional credit. Many Developers have huge ITC balances that have been carried forward from the erstwhile service tax and VAT regimes. If they are forced to shift to the new scheme, they will have no means to adjust the unutilized ITC balances, leading to huge losses.

We will, of course, have to wait for the relevant Notification to be issued by the Central Government in this regard and one fervently hopes that the issues discussed in this article are duly considered.

It is good to see that the Government is proposing not to charge GST on transfer of development rights, at the hands of the Landowners/transferors. Of course, given the fact that the Developer is entitled to avail of ITC of the GST paid by the Landowners, etc., this proposal is unlikely to reduce the costs at the hands of the Developer. Of course, in my strong view, development rights are equivalent to 'land' and consequently, Notification No. 4/2018-CT (Rate) dated 25 th January 2019 would tantamount to levying GST on land and is consequently, bound to struck down by the Courts.

Before concluding....

Seamless flow of credit is at the core of the GST scheme. One is surprised to see the Government push for a GST regime for the all-important Realty Sector, without ITC. It would be better if the Government comes out with a scheme of a reduced GST rate of say, 9% with ITC. Pushing for a GST regime without ITC would mean robbing Paul to pay Peter. Moreover, implementing a scheme for Residential Realty Sector without ITC would be a major deviation from the basic principles of the GST regime, which ideally, should be taken by the new Government after the 2019 general elections. A Government, going into elections, is completely unjust in trying to push a half baked scheme, especially concerning the Realty Sector which employs the largest manpower after agriculture.

One is rather amused to see the Government justifying the proposed reduction in the GST rate as a measure to boost the real estate sector. If the Developers could have afforded it, they could themselves have reduced their basic prices to push up the demand. The Government, by trying to push this scheme down the Developers' throats, is creating more issues for the sector, without any justification.

Currently, Developers who are works contractors, are allowed to classify their output supplies under SAC Sl No. 9954(ii), in terms of which, the actual value of land is allowed to be claimed by them as exemption. It would remain to be seen as to how Developers, who are works contractors, are treated under the proposed regime.

It is understood that many Developers have already started receiving calls from their flat buyers not to bill them till March 31, 2019. While I am not sure as to whether the proposed reduced GST rate would indeed push up demand, it would certainly result in most Developers see significant reduced cash flows till March 31, 2019.

This article is more relevant for the affordable realty segment, given the fact that the proposed reduction in GST is steeper.

The Government/GST Council, for reasons best known, has not addressed issues concerning denial of ITC in terms of Section 17(5)of the GST Act to the commercial realty sector. Neither has it addressed issues concerning refund/adjustment of GST to Developers, on cancellation of flats by the flat buyers. Had we seen some development in this regard, one would not have attributed the present proposal as a pure pre-election gimmick!

(The views expressed are strictly personal.)

(DISCLAIMER : The views expressed are strictly of the author and Taxindiaonline.com doesn't necessarily subscribe to the same. Taxindiaonline.com Pvt. Ltd. is not responsible or liable for any loss or damage caused to anyone due to any interpretation, error, omission in the articles being hosted on the site)

 RECENT DISCUSSION(S) POST YOUR COMMENTS
   
 
Sub: Reduction in GST rates for Realty Sector - missing the basic math

The article by learned authors is totally one-sided in favour of developers . They seem to have not realized that government has been forced to take this action because of certain unscrupulous developers ( in fact a majority of the developers) who lined their own pockets without passing on the ITC benefits to the hapless buyers of flats. They have earned themselves a very bad name by indulging in unfair practices.. Same thing had happened in the case of restaurants Now they are also suffering because of their over-smartness.
In my view, government should ensure that these developers are not allowed to raise prices . If necessary , anti-profiteering law may be amended with retrospective effect. Consultants should refrain from helping crooks

Posted by v gupta
 
Sub: rate reduction for realty

chaos is the reality in realty now.
builders are developing fear and terror in their minds regarding cash flows.
govt is sharing revenue with complexities and anomalies and ambiguities.they are all jointly developing the difficulties for this employment generating sector. seamless credit is proving to be a exempted concept now in gst.jetly bhai and namoh ji kuch to sochiye aur ais a kariye ki market men paisa aaye. jo taxable hi nahi usko exempted karke kis par ehsaan jata rahe hum.

Posted by Navin Khandelwal