Just a moment...

Top
Help
The Most Awaited - AI Search is Live! 🚀

AI-powered research trained on the authentic TaxTMI database.

Launch AI Search

Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
+ Post a Query
Post a New Query
Title :
0/200 char
Description :
Max 0 char
Category :
Delete Reply

Are you sure you want to delete your reply beginning with '' ?

Delete Issue

Are you sure you want to delete your Issue titled: '' ?

Discussion Forum

Back

All Issues

Advanced Search
Reset Filters
Search By:
Search by Text :
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms
Select Date:
FromTo
Category :
OR
Search by Issue ID:
NOTE: If you have inputs in both the fields, then results will be shown for issueId first.
Issue ID :

ITC on Support services by JV to its member

Narayan Pujar

In one of the cases, two parties formed a Joint Venture (JV) pursuant to a railway contract awarded to the JV. As per prevailing industry practice, the entire contract was sub-contracted on a back-to-back (on a toto) basis to the lead member of the JV. Accordingly, the member executed the project and raised invoices on the JV, which in turn raised invoices on the Railways.

Owing to contractual and statutory obligations, the JV incurred certain expenses such as bank guarantee charges, labour cess, audit fees, and similar costs. These expenses are intrinsic and unavoidable for execution of the railway contract and are directly attributable to the said project.

Given that the entire contract was sub-contracted to the JV member, the expenses incurred by the JV effectively constitute support services facilitating execution of the contract by the member. Accordingly, the JV has raised tax invoices on the member towards provision of such support services. The said arrangement is also in consonance with Section 7(1)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017, read with Schedule I, which recognizes certain transactions as deemed supplies.

However, the department has disputed the eligibility of input tax credit (ITC) in the hands of the JV member (recipient), alleging that the transaction is merely a pass-through of expenses and not in the course or furtherance of business.

How should one defend the ITC here?

Input tax credit on JV support services invoiced to a member defended as attributable, invoiced supplies enabling ITC. The issue is entitlement to Input Tax Credit on tax invoices issued by a JV to its lead member for unavoidable, project attributable expenses incurred while executing a subcontracted railway contract. The JV treated those expenses as support services and invoiced the member; the department argues they are mere pass throughs not in the course or furtherance of business. The defence rests on direct attribution of costs to contract performance and characterization of the transactions as deemed supplies under Section 7(1)(c) read with Schedule I, supporting the recipient's ITC claim. (AI Summary)
answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Issues