TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 192
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ty, for two parcels of land to facilitate its operations. The first lease, dated 21st January 2009, was for Land L1, a 96-cent plot at Technopark, for a period of 90 years (2009-2099), for which a down payment of Rs. 1 crore was made. Subsequently, as per a court order dated 29th May 2018, Technopark paid enhanced compensation of Rs. 3,60,25,636 to the original landowners and demanded the same amount from IIITMK vide letter dated 4th December 2018. This amount remains payable and has been added to the leasehold asset and amortised over the remaining lease period. A second lease agreement was entered into on 15th March 2011 for Land L2, a 10.33-acre plot at the Technocity campus, also for 90 years. A down payment of Rs. 3,86,45,256 was ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 7 of the "Interpretation & Understanding of the Provisions." Furthermore, even though the amount of Rs. 3,60,25,636.00 is currently unpaid, it should be treated as deemed consideration, since it is acknowledged and recorded in IIITMK's books. IIITMK requests that this correction be taken into account in the final advance ruling order and expresses regret for the earlier inadvertent error. 2. In this Ruling, a reference hereinafter to the provisions of the CGST Act, Rules or the Notifications issued thereunder shall include a reference to the corresponding provisions of the KSGST Act, Rules or the Notifications issued thereunder. 3. The details of the questions on which advance ruling is sought are given above and are not being re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r has not offered any comments and hence it is presumed that the jurisdictional officer has no specific comments to offer. It is also construed that there are no proceedings pending on the issue against the applicant. 6. Personal Hearing: 6.1 The applicant was granted an opportunity for a personal hearing on 02.04.2025. Sri. Sreeram Sekar, Partner represented the applicant in personal hearing. In the hearing, the submissions made in the written statement were reiterated by the representative. 7. Discussion and Findings: 7.1 The applicant has presented the facts of the case along with their contentions. A lease agreement was executed with Technopark during the pre-GST regime, and the applicant now seeks to cancel that agreement. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....edule I, made or agreed to be made without a consideration; [****] [(1A) where certain activities or transactions constitute a supply in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (1), they shall be treated either as supply of goods or supply of services as referred to in Schedule II.] Schedule II of the Act is as follows: ACTIVITIES [OR TRANSACTIONS] TO BE TREATED AS SUPPLY OF GOODS OR SUPPLY OF SERVICES 1. ... 2. Land and Building (a) any lease, tenancy, easement, licence to occupy land is a supply of services; (b) any lease or letting out of the building including a commercial, industrial or residential complex for business or commerce, either wholly or partly, is a supply of se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ernment or that the compensation paid by the Government for such cancellation in pursuance to the order of the Supreme Court was a consideration for such service. Therefore, the compensation paid for cancellation of coal blocks pursuant to the order of the Supreme Court in the above case was not taxable. The gist of the above is that the cancellation of coal blocks was not based on any agreement where prior allottees consented to or agreed to tolerate the cancellation in exchange for compensation. Instead, the cancellation was imposed by the Government under statutory provisions and pursuant to a Supreme Court order. The compensation paid was not contractual but statutory, and therefore did not involve any supply of service (such as agre....