SC Ruling On User Development Fee Provides Guidance For GST,
SC Ruling On User Development Fee Provides Guidance For GST, Tax On Royalty
|
The SC had held that UDF collected by the DIAL is in the nature of statutory levy and the same would not be taken as consideration against any services.
A recent judgment by the Supreme Court (SC) on the user development fee (UDF) collected by the Delhi International Airport Limited (DIAL) may have ramifications on the goods and services tax (GST) as well as the income tax on royalty etc.
Last week, the apex court had held that UDF collected by the DIAL is in the nature of statutory levy and the same would not be taken as consideration against any services.
As such, no service tax is payable on UDF, the court ruled.
As such, no service tax is payable on UDF, the court ruled.
In determining that the fee collected by the DIAL is in the nature of statutory levy, the court had laid down some principles.
Firstly, UDF is collected for the development of future establishment at the airport and no additional benefit is accrued to passengers, visitors, traders, and airlines upon levy of this fee. Thus, the UDF is in the form of ‘tax or cess’, collected for financing the cost of future projects and the same cannot be taken as consideration for services provided to the customer, visitors, passengers, vendors etc.
Secondly, the collection is not premised on the rendering of any service.
Thirdly, the amounts collected are deposited in an escrow account, not within the control of the assessee.
Fourthly, the utilization of funds is monitored and regulated by law.
Though the ruling related to the pre-GST matter, experts said the principles laid down by the SC should be applied to the GST too.
“The impact of principles laid down in the judgment would need to be analyzed under the GST legislation which specifically provides that statutory levies other than GST collected by the supplier would form part of the value of supply,” said Saurabh Agarwal, tax partner at EY.
Besides, the principles may be used for determining whether the tax be paid on royalty etc, he said.
“These may be useful in determining whether the consideration in the form of fee, royalty, etc collected by the government from business entities would be in the nature of the statutory levy or the same would be considered as a consideration against any services,” he said.
Source..
Source..
Post Categories
Featured Posts
Latest Posts
Latest Posts
SC Ruling On User Development Fee Provides Guidance For GST Tax On Royalty...
The nbsp SC nbsp had held that nbsp UDF nbsp collected by the nbsp DIAL nbsp is in the nature of statutory levy and the same would not be taken as consideration against any services A recent judgment by the...
Navigating the Future The Rising Demand for Faster Resolutions through Arbitration...
Dear community In the ever-evolving landscape of dispute resolution the demand for faster and more efficient solutions is on the rise As businesses and individuals seek alternatives to protracted litigation arbitration has emerged as a compelling choice Let's delve into...
Documents Can Be Produced During Cross-Examination In Civil Trial To Confront Party To Suit...
In a notable judgment the Supreme Court has held that a document can produced during cross-examination in a civil trial to confront a party to the suit or a witness The Court also held that there is no distinction between...
Supreme Court Questions Effectiveness Of Delhi's 'Odd-Even' Scheme In Controlling Pollution...
The Supreme Court on Tuesday November questioned the effectiveness of the Delhi Government's odd-even scheme in controlling air pollution while terming it as ldquo optics rdquo Under this scheme vehicles with license plate numbers ending in an even digit are...
BREAKING Arbitration Clauses In Unstamped Agreements Enforceable Supreme Court -Judge Bench Overrules 'NN Global'...
A seven-judge bench of the Supreme Court on Wednesday December ruled that arbitration clauses in unstamped or inadequately stamped agreements are enforceable Insufficiency of stamping does not make the agreement void or unenforceable but makes it inadmissible in evidence...
Speak With Our
Get a Appointment