Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the incentive paid by the State Government to cooperative banks under the scheme was a subsidy and, if not, whether it formed consideration for supply and was liable to GST.
Analysis: The State Government resolution used distinct expressions for interest subsidy to borrowers and incentive to banks. The incentive was payable to banks on achievement of lending targets and varied with the quantum of disbursement, which showed that it was performance-linked remuneration and not a subsidy to borrowers. The amount therefore fell within the breadth of consideration under section 2(31) of the CGST Act, 2017, since the statutory exclusion applies only to subsidy given by the Central Government or a State Government. The claim that the amount was covered by section 7(2), Schedule III, or as an actionable claim was rejected because the payment did not answer those descriptions. The plea based on differential interest and Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) was also rejected, since the exemption was not established and exemption notifications must be strictly construed.
Conclusion: The incentive was held to be taxable consideration and not subsidy, actionable claim, or exempt differential interest; the appeal was rejected.