2019 (5) TMI 311 - AAR - GST

Classification of supply - supply of construction services - Bundled services - composite supply - principal supply/main supply - HELD THAT - There is no doubt that the Applicant is a taxable person and the services offered in the bundle described in para 3.1 are taxable services. It is also clear from the context that construction service is the dominant element in the bundle - Moreover, the recipient, while agreeing to buy these services as a bundle, cannot enjoy the other services unless he agrees to buy the service of constructing the allotted dwelling unit. Furthermore, developers of residential complexes usually offer these services in a bundle. Although one has the option not to pay for the right to use car parking space, he cannot buy it, or for that matter any other service in the bundle, separately. The recipient has to buy these services only as a package, where the construction service remains the predominant element. Thus, the services are naturally bundled and offered in conjunction with one another in the ordinary course of business, and the other services of the bundle are ancillary to the supply of the construction service, which describes the essential character of the bundle of services being supplied. The Applicant is providing a composite supply of the bundle of services, construction service being the principal supply. Entire value of the composite supply is, therefore, to be treated, for the purpose of taxation, as the supply of construction service, taxable under Sl No. 3(i) read with Paragraph 2 of the Rate Notification.

Summary

Issues:
1. Admissibility of the Application
2. Submissions of the Applicant
3. Submission of the Revenue
4. Observation & Findings of the Authority

Admissibility of the Application:
The Applicant, a joint venture for real estate projects, sought a ruling on whether providing services like preferential location constitutes a composite supply with construction service as the principal supply. The issue was deemed admissible under section 97(2)(a) & (b) of the GST Act, with no objections raised by the revenue officer, leading to the admission of the application.

Submissions of the Applicant:
The Applicant argued that services like directional advantage and floor rise are integral to the construction service provided. They contended that these services are naturally bundled with construction service, forming a composite supply where construction is the dominant element. Referring to section 8(a) of the GST Act, the Applicant claimed that abatement should apply to the entire value of the composite supply.

Submission of the Revenue:
The Revenue officer asserted that the Applicant offers a composite supply to buyers, with construction service being the main supply. They suggested considering abatement for construction under the Rate Notification for taxation purposes based on this arrangement.

Observation & Findings of the Authority:
The Authority analyzed the Agreement terms and the nature of services offered by the Applicant. They examined whether the services were naturally bundled and supplied in conjunction with one another in the ordinary course of business. After detailed scrutiny, it was concluded that the Applicant provides a composite supply with construction service as the principal supply. Therefore, the entire value of the composite supply was to be treated as the supply of construction service for tax purposes under the relevant Notification.

Ruling:
The final ruling stated that the Applicant's provision of construction service bundled with other services constitutes a composite supply, with construction service as the principal supply. The entire value of this composite supply was to be treated as the supply of construction service for taxation purposes as per the specified Notification. The ruling was declared valid unless declared void under the provisions of the GST Act.

This judgment clarifies the treatment of composite supplies in the context of real estate projects, emphasizing the dominant element in the supply arrangement for tax purposes. The analysis considered the nature of bundled services and their relationship to the principal supply, providing a comprehensive ruling on the admissibility and taxation aspects of the Applicant's case.