Classification of property under GST: excluding immovable subcategories risks incoherent goods vs services treatment.
Classification of 'property' under GST is problematic where statutes exclude an immovable sub category such as residential dwellings: the exclusion implies the governing category must be the broader class of properties rather than conflating distinct movable and immovable natures. The article argues immovable properties should be treated as services, not goods, and warns against using a generic notion of 'property' to encompass both goods and services under GST. (AI Summary)

Classification of Goods vs Services: advance booking or WIP does not convert goods into services, affecting GST treatment.
Advance booking or acquisition of an item in a work in progress state does not convert the supply of that item into a supply of services; a product intended to be manufactured or constructed remains a good throughout production. This principle applies to goods supplied under contract manufacture, white labelling and to immovable property: an under construction flat is an immovable good from inception and should not be reclassified as a construction service simply because it is sold before completion. (AI Summary)

Ultra vires rule: guarantees create risk not benefit, so valuation in absence of supply cannot sustain a tax levy.
Rule 28(2) treats a loan guarantee as creating a taxable benefit, but a guarantee imposes risk of indemnification and, lacking contractual privity and a transferable service, does not constitute a supply; therefore valuation rules applied in the absence of supply are ultra vires. (AI Summary)

Jurisdiction to limit GST registration threshold: notification imposing limitations is invalid without statutory authority and unenforceable.
The article contends that the third proviso to S.22(1) authorises enhancement of the registration threshold for specified suppliers but that S.23(2) lacks jurisdiction to impose substantive limitations excluding beneficiaries; accordingly, limitations inserted by the notification are non jurisdictional, void ab initio, and a valid limiting notification must be issued under the correct statutory authority. (AI Summary)

Price-linked subsidy: treated as consideration when linked to supplier price, affecting GST valuation and supply character.
Subsidies under GST arise when a recipient applies for and satisfies obligations, making the obligation the operative object that confers beneficiary status. Only price-linked subsidies affect valuation; the Explanation excludes subsidies that merely accrue to recipients. Payments to suppliers can be payment against obligations rather than subsidy receipts. A subsidized price differs from a discounted price, and the "withdrawal-failure" test assesses whether supply depends on the subsidy. Subsidies function as a tripartite construct, and non-monetary concessional support does not automatically establish a subsidized rate. (AI Summary)

Obligation to tolerate requires a real right not to tolerate; mere default tolerance cannot amount to acceptance.
An obligation to tolerate presupposes an available right to refuse tolerance; where tolerance is the unavoidable default it cannot be treated as an obligation because obligation requires acceptance based on an offer and lawful authority. Tolerance involves relinquishment and is not equivalent to consideration; damages address breach rather than tolerated conduct. Proactive tolerance can be waived and later repudiated, enabling the creditor to end previously tolerated non-performance. (AI Summary)

Basic structure: amendments must preserve foundational principles; otherwise retrospective relaxations and amnesties risk legal confusion.
The article criticises GST Council recommendations for ad hoc, retrospective relaxations and subordinate legislation overreach that undermine legal certainty, urging that amnesty measures not be worse than the defaults they cure and calling for a principled overhaul grounded in a basic structure that preserves foundational legal principles while improving implementation governance. (AI Summary)

Voluntary payment misuse: GST payments must follow liability creation and return-based self-assessment procedures.
Payments under GST must correspond to a recognised liability and be discharged through valid mechanisms: self-assessment via a proper return or a demand that results in a debit to the e-Liability Register. Administrative forms or practices that permit payment for other "causes" or route self-assessed liabilities through DRC-03 to avoid statutory return and demand procedures are improper, and intimation under sections 73/74(5) requires formal issuance through DRC-01A. (AI Summary)