Karnataka HC rules solatium compensation for land acquisition by State/KIADB exempt from GST under Schedule III Entry 5

Karnataka HC held that compensation paid as solatium for land acquisition by State/KIADB is not liable to GST under CGST/KGST Act. The court ruled that land sales are covered under Entry 5 of Schedule III, making them exempt from GST. Even without this exemption, land transactions fall under State List II and GST legislation does not intend to tax immovable property sales/acquisitions. The court distinguished between contract conditions and consideration, finding that solatium payments are not "supply of services" under Schedule II Entry 5(e). The impugned notices and orders were quashed as illegal and without jurisdiction. Petition was allowed.

---

---

ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED

The core legal questions considered in these petitions are:

(i) Whether the compensation paid to the petitioners towards the acquisition of their lands by the State/KIADB under the head 'Solatium' is subject to the levy of GST under the provisions of the CGST/KGST Act, 2017Rs.

(ii) Whether the impugned show cause notices and orders issued by the respondents are valid and enforceable under the lawRs.

ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

(i) GST on Solatium

Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The relevant legal framework includes the CGST Act, 2017, KGST Act, 2017, and the definitions and provisions therein regarding the supply of goods and services. The court also considered various circulars issued by the tax authorities, including Circular No. 177/09/2022-GST and Circular No. 178/10/2022-GST, which provide guidance on the interpretation of the GST provisions. The court referred to several precedents, including the judgments in Union of India vs. Tarsem Singh and Panna Lal Ghosh vs. Land Acquisition Collector, which discuss the nature of solatium.

Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The court concluded that solatium, as part of the compensation for compulsory acquisition, is not subject to GST. The court reasoned that solatium is a statutory compensation for the compulsory nature of land acquisition and does not constitute a supply of goods or services under the GST framework. The court emphasized that the transaction is essentially a transfer of land, which is exempt from GST under Entry 5 of Schedule III of the CGST/KGST Act.

Key Evidence and Findings: The court examined the agreements and documents executed between the petitioners and KIADB, which indicated that the compensation, including solatium, was paid as part of the acquisition process. The court found that there was no separate agreement to tolerate an act or refrain from an act in exchange for the solatium.

Application of Law to Facts: The court applied the provisions of the CGST/KGST Act and the relevant circulars to the facts of the case, concluding that the solatium paid to the petitioners does not fall within the scope of taxable supply under GST.

Treatment of Competing Arguments: The court rejected the respondents' argument that the solatium constituted a supply of services under Entry 5(e) of Schedule II of the CGST/KGST Act. The court clarified that the solatium is not paid for tolerating an act but is part of the statutory compensation for land acquisition.

Conclusions: The court concluded that the solatium paid to the petitioners is not subject to GST, and the impugned notices and orders demanding GST on solatium are without legal basis and must be quashed.

SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS

The court held that:

(i) "The compensation paid in favour of the petitioners towards acquisition of their lands by the State/KIADB under the Head 'Solatium' is not exigible/amenable to levy of GST under the provisions of CGST/KGST Act, 2017."

(ii) The court emphasized that solatium is a statutory compensation for the compulsory nature of land acquisition and does not constitute a supply of goods or services under the GST framework.

(iii) The court quashed the impugned notices and orders issued by the respondents, declaring them illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction or authority of law.

The court's decision establishes the principle that solatium, as part of the compensation for compulsory land acquisition, is not subject to GST, reinforcing the interpretation that such compensation is exempt from GST under the relevant statutory framework.

---