Temple auction rights may be taxable services, while agricultural harvesting and certain religious-place rentals remain GST exempt.

Auction or tender arrangements granting exclusive rights to collect temple offerings, abandoned clothes, perform rituals, or manage toilets and washrooms are treated as taxable supplies of services when they are commercial licences for consideration. Rights to harvest coconuts from temple lands are covered by the agricultural-services exemption, and renting precincts of a religious place for pooja item stalls is exempt subject to notification conditions. Honorarium or sitting fees paid to the President and Members of the Board do not attract reverse charge because they are not directors. Legal services received from advocates by a business entity remain liable under reverse charge.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether auctioning or tendering of rights to collect rice and coconuts offered by devotees, abandoned clothes, and to perform religious rituals, to manage toilets and washrooms, and legal services received from advocates constituted taxable supplies under the GST law; (ii) whether auctioning of rights to harvest coconuts from temple lands and to rent space for pooja item stalls was exempt from GST; (iii) whether honorarium or sitting fees paid to the President and Members of the Board attracted reverse charge liability; and (iv) whether legal services received from advocates attracted reverse charge liability.

Issue (i): Whether auctioning or tendering of rights to collect rice and coconuts offered by devotees, abandoned clothes, and to perform religious rituals, to manage toilets and washrooms, and legal services received from advocates constituted taxable supplies under the GST law.

Analysis: The Authority treated the Board's recurring tender and auction arrangements as contractual grants of exclusive rights for consideration, held that such grants were supplies of services, and found that the auction mechanism did not change the essential character of the transactions. The rights to collect offerings and abandoned clothes, to perform rituals, and to operate and maintain toilets and washrooms were held to be commercial licences or rights granted for consideration in the course or furtherance of business. Legal services received from advocates were also held to be received by a business entity and therefore subject to reverse charge.

Conclusion: The receipts from auctioning rights to collect rice and coconuts offered by devotees, abandoned clothes, to perform rituals, and to manage toilets and washrooms are taxable under GST, and legal services received from advocates are taxable under reverse charge.

Issue (ii): Whether auctioning of rights to harvest coconuts from temple lands and to rent space for pooja item stalls was exempt from GST.

Analysis: The Authority held that the right to harvest coconuts from temple lands was directly related to agricultural operations, including harvesting, and therefore fell within the exemption for agricultural services. It further held that renting precincts of a religious place for pooja item stalls was covered by the exemption for renting of precincts of a religious place, subject to the monetary and other conditions in the notification.

Conclusion: The auctioning of rights to harvest coconuts from temple lands is exempt from GST, and the renting of space for pooja item stalls is also exempt subject to the notification conditions.

Issue (iii): Whether honorarium or sitting fees paid to the President and Members of the Board attracted reverse charge liability.

Analysis: The Authority held that reverse charge under the director-services entry applies only to services supplied by a director of a company or body corporate. It found that the President and Members of the Board are statutory functionaries and not directors in law for that purpose.

Conclusion: Honorarium and sitting fees paid to the President and Members of the Board do not attract GST under reverse charge.

Issue (iv): Whether legal services received from advocates attracted reverse charge liability.

Analysis: The Authority held that legal services supplied by advocates to a business entity fall within the reverse charge entry, and that the Board's activities made it a business entity for this purpose.

Conclusion: Legal services received from advocates are liable to GST under reverse charge.

Final Conclusion: The ruling partly upholds the taxability of the Board's auction-based rights and related services while granting exemption for specified agricultural and religious-place renting activities, and it excludes reverse charge on honorarium and sitting fees to Board members.

Ratio Decidendi: A competitive auction or tender that grants an exclusive right or licence for consideration is a supply of services when the substance of the arrangement is commercial, while statutory exemptions apply only where the actual supply falls squarely within the notification entry.

---