Taxmann's GST & Allied Laws

© All rights reserved

Price : ` 1395

Law stated in this book is as amended upto May, 2024

Published by :

Taxmann Publications (P.) Ltd.

Sales & Marketing :

59/32, New Rohtak Road, New Delhi-110 005 India

Phone : +91-11-45562222

Website : www.taxmann.com

E-mail : sales@taxmann.com

Regd. Office :

21/35, West Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi-110 026 India

Printed at :

Tan Prints (India) Pvt. Ltd.

44 Km. Mile Stone, National Highway, Rohtak Road Village Rohad, Distt. Jhajjar (Haryana) India

E-mail : sales@tanprints.com

Disclaimer

Every effort has been made to avoid errors or omissions in this publication. In spite of this, errors may creep in. Any mistake, error or discrepancy noted may be brought to our notice which shall be taken care of in the next edition. It is notified that neither the publisher nor the author or seller will be responsible for any damage or loss of action to any one, of any kind, in any manner, therefrom. It is suggested that to avoid any doubt the reader should cross-check all the facts, law and contents of the publication with original Government publication or notifications.

No part of this book may be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means [graphic, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping, or information retrieval systems] or reproduced on any disc, tape, perforated media or other information storage device, etc., without the written permission of the publishers. Breach of this condition is liable for legal action.

For binding mistake, misprints or for missing pages, etc., the publisher’s liability is limited to replacement within seven days of purchase by similar edition. All expenses in this connection are to be borne by the purchaser. All disputes are subject to Delhi jurisdiction only.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

A Jatin Christopher, is a Chartered Accountant, Cost Accountant and Law graduate. He qualified as a Chartered Accountant in 1996 and has been in practice since 2000 specializing in indirect tax advisory and litigation matters in, both, Central and State tax legislations. He is a resource person for ICAI and Government in the areas of Customs, Foreign Trade Policy and GST. His views and contributions are well published in several respected fora. He practices in a full-service firm based in Bangalore.

PREFACE

Words are the skin of a living thought, and when Legislature clothes policy thinking in words, they must be credited to have deep understanding of their meaning in laws that exist on that date. When there was an imminent leakage of revenue, Apex Court simply pointed litigants, in the rst Ganon Dunkerley case, to rst principles in Sale of Goods Act when the pith of the con ict then was revolving around ‘sale’. When pithy deliberations in GST are about ‘forms’ of supply, recourse to rst principles on formation of the arrangement and locate tests that establish their enforceability must be had without another rap-on-the-knuckles moment before Apex Court.

With the right to recover GST from Customers established in the previous publication not to be a statutory right but a contractual remedy, all popular understanding has been exposed as unreliable and perilous to permit to pollinate any deliberation in GST. This demands unequivocal determination of facts. Facts being distillate from information of a business. Assertions on facts before one regulator are rendered undeniable before another, unless these legislations selected for comparison are not ‘allies’.

Allied laws are exactly that – allies – to GST. And contradiction in assertions become the evidence that Revenue needs to impeach self-assessment carried out, especially, when assertions under allied laws have been made without the motivations that ever present in carrying out self-assessment. Apart from assertions, position of law needed in determining the self-assessment to be carried out, very often, emanate from allied laws. Unregistered document destroys any assertion of ‘interest’ in immovable property. And agreement-holders have no ‘interest’ in property that is yet to come into existence, to the disbelief of the Offeror. Equally unbelievable is that a contract for sale of future goods is not a contract but only a promise. Expired medicines are not goods and hence, services in GST. And income attributable to overseas PE attracts GST on reverse charge basis.

GST is many things but its certainly not easy. It’s simple in what is requires but its departure from earlier tax regime brings is remarkable uneasiness. Clarity of procedure as a means of justice delivery coupled with near absent discretion is new to taxation. Abandoning this collection of tax based on substance of transaction by a collective and cumulative discovery of facts as dispute makes its way from inquiry to adjudication and even in appeal,

is so unbelievable that taxpayers are still making a beeline to the tax department with a mountain of les hoping to prevail upon someone’s good conscience to be let off.

The next best alternative is to restart the process of explaining statutory provisions from the plain words used by Legislature. But this has brought untold misery in the interpretational experimentation since 2017 and there seems to be something missing. And that is - recourse to rst principles!

Everything has a history. Every word has meaning. A string of words paints the picture of the policy thinking in allowing credit, denying refund or tax payment afresh. This new law is not new if the strings that make up this garment can be recognized. Throw back to 1872 and there is a world of answers that explains nearly everything treatment to apply. This work strives to present inviolable facts from allied laws that Legislature assumes everyone ought to know; so that, from here on, no one gets to say “I wish someone had told that this is how it works”.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Lessons learnt from works of others demands not only acknowledging them but also point young readers to consider their own study of those works. This is found in each chapter by providing references to speci c commentaries and authoritative judicial decision. Special thanks to three people “5-7-11” who get behind every project that takes away time that belongs to them.

CHAPTER-HEADS

About the Author

Preface

Acknowledgement Chapter-Heads

1 BACKGROUND

2 CONTRACT ACT

2.2.3

2.3.1

2.3.2 Counter-offer 2.3.3

2.3.11

2.3.12 Record of contract

I-17

2.4.17

2.4.25 2.4.26

2.4.27 2.4.28

Contract document

Contractual damages

2.9.1

2.9.2

2.9.3 Insurance contract

2.9.4

2.10 Guarantee

2.12.5

2.12.6

2.12.7

2.12.8

2.12.9

2.12.10

2.12.11

2.12.12

2.12.13 2.12.14

3 SALE OF GOODS ACT

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.2.1 Goods

3.2.2 Future goods

3.2.3

3.2.4

3.2.5

3.2.6

3.2.7

3.3.1

3.3.2

3.3.3

3.3.4

3.3.5

3.3.6

3.3.7 Manufacture

3.3.8

3.3.9

3.3.10

3.3.11

3.4

3.5

3.3.12

3.3.13 IPR

3.4.1

3.4.2

3.4.3

3.4.4 3.4.5

3.4.6

3.5.1

3.5.2

3.5.3

3.6 Not-a-sale

3.6.1

3.6.2

3.6.3

3.6.4

3.6.5

3.6.6

3.6.7

3.6.8

3.6.9

3.7 Deemed sales

3.7.1

3.7.2 3.7.3

3.8 3.8.1 3.8.2

3.8.3

3.8.4 GMP contracts

3.8.5

3.8.6

CONTENTS

3.9

3.8.7

3.8.8

3.8.9

3.8.10

3.8.11

3.8.12

3.9.1 Lease of goods

3.9.2

3.9.3

4 PARTNERSHIP ACT

4.1

4.2

4.2.1

4.2.2

4.2.3 AOP

4.2.4 4.2.5

4.2.6 4.2.7

4.2.8

5 TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT

5.1

5.2

5.2.1

5.2.2

5.2.3

5.2.4

5.2.5

5.2.6

CONTENTS

5.2.7

5.2.8

5.2.9

5.2.10

5.2.11

5.3

5.4

5.3.1

5.3.2

5.3.3 Document

5.3.4

5.3.5

5.3.6

5.3.7

5.4.1

5.4.2

5.5 Mortgage

5.5.1

5.5.2

5.5.3

5.5.4

5.5.5

5.6 Lease

5.6.1

5.6.2

5.6.3

5.6.4

5.6.5

5.6.6 Lease-free usage

5.6.7

5.6.8

5.6.9 Death of Lessee

5.6.10

CONTENTS

5.6.11 Lease-cum-sale

5.6.12

5.6.13

5.7 Exchange

5.7.1

5.7.2

5.8

5.9

5.8.1 Nature of transfer

5.8.2

5.8.3

5.8.4

5.8.5

5.8.6 Grant

5.9.1

5.9.2

5.9.3 Endorsement

5.9.4 5.9.5

5.9.10

6 REGISTRATION ACT

6.1

6.2

6.2.1

6.2.2

6.2.3

6.2.4

6.2.5

7 EASEMENTS ACT

8 LIMITATION ACT 8.1

8.2.5

8.2.6

8.2.7

8.2.8

9 INCOME-TAX ACT

9.1 9.2 9.2.1 Person

9.2.2 9.2.3 9.2.4 9.2.5

9.2.6 9.2.7

I-25

CUSTOMS ACT

11 SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONES ACT

12 COMPANIES ACT

12.2.4 Branches

Merger

12.4.1 Contours of IBC

13 SECURITIES CONTRACTS ACT

14 SOVEREIGN COMMERCE

15 MINERALS LAWS

16 LEGAL METROLOGY ACT

17 REAL ESTATE (REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT

Commencement

17.2.7

17.2.8

17.2.9 Escrow

17.2.10

17.2.11

RREP

18 CARRIER LAWS

18.1

18.2

18.3

18.2.1 Agent

18.2.2

18.2.3

18.2.4

18.3.1 v 18.3.2 v 18.3.3 18.3.4

19 MOTOR VEHICLES ACT

20 COMPETITION ACT

21 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAWS 21.1

21.3.2 21.3.3

21.3.4 21.3.5

21.3.6

21.3.7 Case law

21.3.10 21.3.11

22 MEDICAL LAWS

22.1 22.2

22.3.7 Other care

22.4

22.3.8 Bone-setters

22.3.9

22.3.10

22.3.11

22.3.12

22.3.13 Care

22.3.14

22.3.15

22.3.16 Mental health

22.3.17

22.3.18

22.3.19

22.3.20

22.3.21 Alternate treatment and care

22.3.22

22.4.1

22.4.2

22.4.3

22.4.4

22.4.5 Health-tech

23 EDUCATION LAWS

23.1

23.2

23.2.1

23.2.2

23.2.3 v

23.2.4

23.2.5 v

23.2.6 v 23.3

23.3.1

24

24.1

23.3.2

Home school 23.3.6

Contract educators

23.4.2

23.4.4 23.4.5 Edtech

INTERNET INTERMEDIARIES

25 INSURANCE LAWS

25.2

25.3

25.2.1 Actors

25.2.2

25.2.3

25.2.4

25.3.1 Contract of assurance

25.3.2

25.3.3

25.3.4

25.3.5

26 BANKING LAWS

26.1

26.2

26.2.1

26.2.2

26.2.3

26.2.4

26.2.5

26.2.6

26.3 FEMA

26.3.1 Current account

26.3.2

26.3.3 Nostro and Vostro

26.3.4

26.3.5

26.3.6

26.3.7

26.3.8

26.3.9

26.3.10

26.3.11

26.3.12 FDI

26.3.13 ODI

26.4

26.4.1

26.4.2 NPA

26.4.3

26.4.4

26.4.5

26.4.6

26.4.7

26.4.8 Voucher v

27 GAMING

27.1

27.2

27.3

27.2.1 Wager

27.2.2

27.2.3

27.2.4

27.2.5 Game wallet

27.2.6

27.2.7

27.2.8

27.3.1

27.3.2

27.3.3 Arcade games

27.3.4 Console games

27.3.5

27.3.6 Card games

27.3.7

27.3.8

27.3.9

27.3.10 RMG

CONTENTS

27.4

27.5

27.3.11

27.3.12

27.4.1 v

27.4.2 Pool v

27.4.3

27.4.4

27.5.1

27.5.2

27.5.3 In-game trade

27.5.4

27.5.5 v

28 CRIMINAL LAWS

28.1

28.2

28.3

28.2.1 Fact

28.2.2

28.2.3

28.2.4

28.2.5

28.2.6

28.2.7

28.2.8

28.2.9

28.2.10

28.2.11

28.2.12

28.2.13

28.2.14

28.3.1

29 GENERAL CLAUSES ACT

29.2.3

29.2.4

29.2.5

CHAPTER

Transfer of Property Act

5.1 Relevance to GST

Erroneous to think that GST cannot apply to transactions involving immovable property. In Province of Madras v. Boddu Paidanna & Sons AIR 1942 FC 33 (affirmed in appeal in Governor-General v. Province of Madras AIR 1945 PC 98 and quoted with approval in Atiabari Tea Co. v. State of Assam AIR 1961 SC 232) when demand for Central Excise duty was made on manufacture of pressed cake after extraction of groundnut oil (oil-cake) that were sold on payment of applicable sales tax, taxpayer resisted the demand citing ‘double taxation’. Apex Court held that Central Excise duty applies for the taxable event of manufacture whereas Sales tax applies in respect of the taxable event of sale (of those manufactured articles). And although selling price may form basis for quantification of both, there is no double taxation. This might be the simplest presentation of ‘aspect theory’ of taxation.

Exclusion from incidence of GST demands that:

(

a) levy must be expressly made inapplicable to articles such as securities, money, alcoholic liquor and 5 petro-products;

(

b) transactions kept out of the incidence of tax in Schedule III;

(

c) statutory exemption notified under section 11.

Payment of stamp duty in respect of transactions involving immovable property does not procure immunity from the incidence of GST without showing that these transactions fall within one of the three situations listed above for definitive exclusion from the incidence. Stamp duty is paid on the instrument of conveyance and GST is payable on the consideration for the transaction.

When “service means anything…….”, it is important to appreciate that ‘anything includes everything and leave nothing” unless expressly left out. To assume that GST ought not to apply without showing which of these three situations cover a transaction would be an impoverished grasp of the purposes for which 101st Amendment was made. And when article 246A opens with a non obstante clause, aides to article 246A such as Schedule VII and the three lists in it, cannot pollinate deliberations in GST.

167

In order not to falter with immovable property and to locate the contours of the limited exclusion allowed in Schedule III of Central GST Act qua immovable property transactions, it is most essential to engage in deep study of this subject. And Mulla’s work in this area are inescapable for a thorough understanding. Some relevant aspects are presented in this deliberation.

5.2 Immovable property

5.2.1

Statutory definitions

Expressions that have a statutory definition cannot be substituted with expectations about those expressions. And neither exclusion from the definition cannot be forcibly included to suit the needs of a certain tax treatment nor inclusions in the definition shunted out.

Great struggle is evident in the manner in which ‘immovable property’ has been defined and Apex Court had to intervene to declare that the definition in these legislations must be referred for purposes of gaining a well-rounded understanding for purposes of this Act:

Transfer of Property Act Registration Act

Section 3 “ I mmovable Property” does not include standing timber, growing crops or grass;

Section 2(6) “Immovable Property” includes land, buildings, hereditary allowances, rights to ways, lights, ferries, fisheries or any other benefit to arise out of land, and things attached to the earth, or permanently fastened to anything which is attached to the earth, but not standing timber, growing crops nor grass;

General Clauses Act

Section 3(26) “Immovable P roperty” shall include land, benefits to arise out of land, and things attached to the earth, or permanently fastened to anything attached to the earth;

* Article 367 of Constitution states that General Clauses Act, 1897 is applicable even to interpret the Constitution.

This struggle is not without good reason so as not to include those to be excluded and exclude those to be included. Illustrations in the definitions are instructive. Apex Court held in Tarakeshwar Sia Thakurji v. Dar Das Dey Co. (1979) 3 SCC 106 that definition in section 3(26) of General Clauses Act applies to Transfer of Property Act since the definition in section 3 is in the negative, drawing authority from Shantabai v. State of Bombay AIR 1958 SC 532 and before that in Mohammed Ibrahim v. Northern Circars Fibre Trading AIR 1944 Mad 492.

5.2.2 Affixation

‘Able’ in immovable, refers to character of the thing and not capability of any person, to move it. Character goes to ‘manner and purpose’. Capability (of a person or process) does to ‘strength and ability’. Manner of affixation is to render the thing fastened so that it is inextricably bonded with the land or building, to which it is affixed. Method used guides the conviction about the inextricable bond that is sought to be established.

Purpose of affixation must also show a sub-optimal functionality if the thing were not affixed. Functionality is not general functionality but that suited for the person’s needs. Method used also guides this relation to show that it is commensurate with the objective of rendering the thing immovable.

To be unearthed, with or without damage, is no reason to doubt the results of the ‘manner and purpose’ tests administered. To say that the thing affixed can be easily dismantled does not undermine the objective of its affixation. There is nothing in the ‘manner and purpose’ test that requires impairment (on dismantling) an necessary to admit permanence in its affixation.

Tier 2 affixation where an article is ‘attached to that which is embedded’ to earth is also immovable property provided it satisfies the ‘method and purpose’ test.

Building is also a poorly appreciated expression. Factory building may be constructed, and machinery installed inside the building. Alternatively, machinery may be installed, and then protective enclosure may be added in cover the machinery. And it matters if the enclosure-building is part of the machinery or independent of the machinery. And the ‘manner and purpose’ test reveals that the enclosure-building may be:

(a) Means of operating the machinery;

(b) Premises where machinery is operated.

5.2.3

Standing timber

Tree is the most telling example of ‘immovable’ and application of ‘manner and purpose’ test reveals the dependence on land is inalienable for the sapling to derive nourishing and grow to become a tree. But standing timber to be excluded in the definition in section 3 indicates the importance of the choice of words – tree v. standing timber. Standing timber is a tree that is ready for felling. Tree that has reached the end of its dependence on land for nourishment and sustenance and left to itself may continue (or die) but is unlikely to derive any more from that land having already reached the goal of its planting. This is an important understanding to locate the legal purpose of defining ‘immovable property’ to guide treatment when it is the object of contract in different transactions. By the ‘manner and purpose’ test, tree would be immovable property since it is not intended for felling, but when this tree reaches the desired or optimal extent of growth and becomes standing timber, it would NOT remain immovable property if taken up for filling. Of course, there should not be any doubt that tree excludes plant and scientific tests provide the distinction.

Common parlance cannot be of much assistance and only after some (or substantial) refinement will the meaning begin to unfold, and implications become understandable.

5.2.4

Growing crop

Standing timber are on the other side of their life which growing crop have not yet reached. And for this reason, growing crop are excluded from immovable property. When land is sold with growing crop on it, they both form a whole and inseparable ‘object’ of this contract, and for this reason the combined object of transfer will be immovable property. But where the land is leased to an occupier for 10 years, the terms of lease is not for occupier to enjoy the land (with growing crop on it), but to harvest the growing crop once they become full grown and ready for harvest.

After all, duration of lease for 10 years is to allow for growing crop to grow and be harvested. And this land is be returned at the end of the term without any stipulation that the crop must also be returned ‘as it was’ unlike a stipulation when a building taken on lease requires that the building be returned in original condition, subject to normal wear and tear. Stipulation is that the land (only) must be returned along with any new additions and accretions (from last round of sowing that is not ready to harvest). Object of contract (discussed earlier) must be discerned from terms of contract and not from titles to documents.

5.2.5 Intangible immovable property

There is no compulsion that immovable property must be ‘tangible’. Land and building are tangible. Things attached to land and building are also tangible. Any transaction involving sale of such land, building, things attached to either of them, would be transfer (discussed later) of immovable property. But rights qua such tangible immovable property are also immovable but intangible property. Immovable property is commonly referred to being tangible and nothing is farther from the truth that to think that intangible immovable property is impossible.

‘Property’ is not the land or building (or even goods, being movable property). Property is the right qua those things – land or building or goods. And if the thing over which ‘rights’ exist is immovable then it is immovable property and if the thing is movable then it is movable property. Property is commonly (erroneously) referred as the very thing itself and nothing is farther still from the truth.

5.2.6 Benefits to arise from land

Observe that the reference in this expression is to ‘future benefits’, that is, benefits ‘to’ arise which is akin to benefits ‘yet to’ arise and not benefits that ‘already’ arose. Since benefits referred are those that lie in the future then the what lies in the present is the ‘rights to those benefits’. That is, there is one kind of intangible right in present that is enforceable and allows holder of those rights to enjoy benefits when those things come into existence. There is another kind of tangible or intangible right being future benefits that are not yet enforceable until those things exist. And this ‘right in present’ can be already be transferred as per law so that the Transferee will enjoy those benefits (when they arise) leaving Transferor at present to enjoy proceeds from transfer of that right.

Transferor’s rights are intangible immovable property. Transferee’s rights are tangible property (if benefits are goods like fruits to be harvested or fish to be caught) or intangible property (if benefits are right to use (lease) or right to construct and develop). And benefits to arise from land refers to the right and not the benefit and such right is intangible immovable property.

Uncertainty of yield but certainty of ‘exclusive rights to exploit’ resources from land, is transfer of rights to future goods being benefits to arise from land. This is intangible immovable property rights. But where there is certainty of yield, it is sale of goods. Much has been deliberated about future goods and contract involving future goods being a mere promise at present to contract in future when those goods come into existence, in the context of Sale of Goods Act. And that principle contained in sections 4(3) and 6(3) of that Act is traceable to section 5 of Transfer of Property Act (discussed later) where transfer must be of property in existence and not property that is yet to come into existence. Therefore, benefits ‘to’ arise from land is only the ‘right in present’ to ‘enjoy in future’ the benefits that are attached to immovable property.

There is some element of speculation as to the quantum of benefits (fruits or fish) that may be available but this does not impair Transferor’s authority to enter into this transaction because the ‘right in present’ is the object of transfer and not the ‘benefits in future’. As such, there is no doubt or speculation about the existence of this right in present. Lease being only the ‘form’ in which the transfer in present is made effective and enforceable. It is not without good reason that VR Krishna Iyer J observed that royalty for forest lease is a feudalistic euphemism for price of timber permitted to be extracted (although this decision was overruled in State of Orissa v. Titaghur Paper Mills Company Ltd. 1985 AIR 1293 (SC).

Greater rights comprise of several lesser rights. When the greater right is the admitted ‘object of transfer’, no treatment may be extended to lesser rights that also get transferred along with the transfer (of greater rights) because these lesser rights were not the ‘object of transfer’. And where the greater right is excluded from the treatment in GST, then all lesser rights avail the same exclusion as they are not vivisected.

5.2.7 Profit-a-prendre

French law uses this expression profit-a-prendre, which means right of ‘taking away’ that a determinate person or an indeterminate group of persons enjoy.

Profit-a-prendre is much more than easement (discussed later) where easements include profit-a-prendre. And profit-a-prendre that is not included in easement would be ‘profit-a-prendre in gross’ which does not exist independent of a dominant heritage (discussed later). Right to take away is NOT easement under Easements Act. Easement is all the dominant rights over another’s immovable property and where profit-a-prendre bears the indicia of an easement, then those would be included as easement.

Lease is an intangible immovable property where ‘possessory rights’ are transferred by creating an ‘interest’ in the immovable property in favour of the Lessee to the exclusion of even the Lessor (discussed later). The ‘form’ of an arrangement may be a lease but the terms of lease permit Lessee to ‘take away’ the harvest of the land only to return land per se at the end of term is not lease but lease to enable ‘taking away’ or profit-a-prendre.

And where the contract is ‘with a view to’ permit taking away of produce of the land – fruit or ore – is a contract for sale of chattel as chattel. Recollect the opening statement that tree is a warehouse of fruits on it, ready for harvest.

Profit-a-prendre is the right to take away and not the chattel taken away. Profit-a-prendre in gross is the right of taking away that is inextricably connected with land (dominant heritage). This right of taking away (before anything is taken away) is intangible immovable property that can lawfully be transferred, and the Transferee does the ‘taking away’. Where Transferee is permitted to take away chattel in present, then it is a contract for sale of goods, but whether Transferee is permitted to take away chatte of the future, it is the right that is transferred since the chattel is not yet in existence.

5.2.8 Land, a specie

Land, therefore, is NOT the whole of the discussion about immovable property. There are many different ‘immovable properties’ in question and land is just one of them. To equate paragraph 5, Schedule III to Central GST Act to every specie of immovable property, whether tangible or intangible, would be an attempt at expanding the words of said Schedule III.

And expanding the words of said Schedule III would be to eliminate the differences between the various species of immovable property that exist in one person to the exclusion of all others. Immovable property is not limited to tangible immovable property and contains vast number of ‘rights’ that are less than ‘title’ but which procure lawful enjoyment akin to ownership. Immovable property is a universe of things and land or building are just two of the many things that make up this universe. It includes rights to exploit the benefits inherent which is intangible immovable property and the very special right to ‘taking away’ that which the land (earth) has produced (current yield) and is yet to produce (future yield).

5.2.9 Registration

Immovable property, whether tangible or intangible, is void if it is conveyed without a registered written instrument. Registration does not itself assure title. Registration is a record of title. Unregistered record is no record. Verbal contracts are permitted and in certain laws customary gifts like Hiba is even recognized. But where non-testamentary instrument conveys interest, right or title, registration is sine qua non (discussed later).

Asserting existence of rights demand production of registered written record. Absence of such a record raises presumption against person asserting title to property. Lease for a period of more than one (1) year is void unless in writing and duly registered (see section 107). This is the reason for the popular practice of have eleven (11) month lease arrangements that are not written or written but not stamped and registered.

5.2.10

Movable property

Without a definition in this Act, reference to General Clauses Act and Registration Act are inevitable:

General Clauses Act

Section 3(36) “Movable Property” shall mean property of every description, except immovable property;

Registration Act

Section 2(9) “Movable Property” includes standing timber, growing crops and grass, fruit upon and juice in trees, and property of every other description, except immovable property;

For these reasons, determination of ‘object of transfer’ is essential to ensure movable property do not get treatment as immovable property and vice versa. And based on principle traceable to Marshall v. Green between these two definitions, common misconceptions are also cleared.

Unless ‘proprietary rights’ can be exercised over the object, being ‘movable’ alone will not be sufficient to qualify as movable property.

All property are covered by these two definitions. And if it is not property then it is not movable property, even if it is movable. To be property, it must bear all the attributes of a right qua the thing. Contract of sale is not property, but the goods delivered pursuant to that contract are property. Expenditure incurred to acquire a thing does not necessarily make that thing a property, movable or immovable. Unless rights exist, it would NOT be property.

Merely because a market exists does not make the thing a property. And absence of a market does not deny existence of property. Rights are contrasted as chose-in-possession and chose-in-action. Former is stock-on-hand and latter is holder of endorsed bill of lading (authorizing to collect the property). Mere right to sue is not chose-in-action. Right to the property that becomes available when successful in suit makes the right a chose-inaction and property in every sense. And where the property is movable, this right is also movable property. Rights are broader than property. Property is the sub-set and rights form the superset. Rights must be enforceable otherwise they will not be property (see examples provided earlier). Rights become vested when conditions to their vesting are satisfied. And vesting conditions on failure (to be satisfied) operate as divesting conditions. And until they become vested, they are inchoate (in formation). Vested rights that are property enjoy the protection afforded by Constitution against unlawful deprivation in article 300A.

5.2.11 Actionable claim

Beneficial interest in movable property that is not yet in existence is ‘actionable’ in a Court of law. And a claim admissible in an ‘action’ in a Court of law is ‘actionable claim’. Sections 3 and 130 address actionable claims in this Act.

GST & Allied Laws

AUTHOR : A JATIN CHRISTOPHER

PUBLISHER : TAXMANN

DATE OF PUBLICATION : MAY 2024

EDITION : 2nd Edition

ISBN NO : 9789357784221

NO. OF PAGES : 540

BINDING TYPE : PAPERBACK

DESCRIPTION

Rs. 1395 | USD 19

This book presents a detailed commentary on the interplay between the Goods and Services Tax (GST) and various allied laws, offering an in-depth analysis of how these laws intersect and influence each other. It aims to help readers understand the foundational principles and legislative intricacies that govern GST and its application. The structured approach ensures that readers can grasp the multifaceted relationship between GST and allied laws, enhancing their ability to handle GST-related legal and procedural challenges.

The book benefits legal practitioners, policymakers, and businesses seeking to understand the complex GST regime with a solid grounding in allied laws. It includes extensive references to judicial decisions and legislative amendments. The Present Publication is the 2nd Edition | 2024 and has been amended up to May 2024. This book is authored by CA A Jatin Christopher, with the following noteworthy features:

• [Introduction to Legislative Language]

o Emphasizes the importance of understanding legislative language and its impact on policy interpretation

o Discusses how the Legislature's choice of words reflects deep policy thinking and the necessity of comprehending these meanings within the legal framework

• [Historical Precedents]

o Highlights historical cases to illustrate the importance of first principles from the Sale of Goods Act in resolving legal conflicts, particularly those revolving around the concept of 'sale.'

• [Right to Recover GST]

o Focuses on the right to recover GST as a contractual remedy rather than a statutory right

o Challenges common misconceptions and stresses the importance of factual accuracy and consistency in legal assertions across different regulatory frameworks

• [Role of Allied Laws]

o Discusses how contradictions in assertions made under allied laws can serve as evidence against taxpayers

o Examines the pivotal role of allied laws in shaping the GST landscape, including the nuances of contract formation and enforceability

• [Complexities of Self-Assessment]

o Thoroughly examines the complexities of self-assessment under GST

o Discusses how allied laws contribute to the determination of self-assessment procedures and the implications of contradicting assertions for taxpayers

• [Sectoral Insights]

o Provides practical insights into various sectors, such as real estate, education, internet intermediaries, and gaming

o Highlights the unique GST implications for each sector, offering valuable guidance for sector-specific challenges

• [Procedural Clarity]

o Underscores the importance of procedural clarity in GST administration

o Advocates for adherence to legislative intent to mitigate interpretational challenges and ensure effective applica tion of GST