HomeGSTGST Demand on Transfer of Development Rights Stayed: Karnataka High Court Questions...

GST Demand on Transfer of Development Rights Stayed: Karnataka High Court Questions Jurisdiction U/s 74

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Karnataka High Court has stayed the operation of a GST adjudication order issued under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017, after prima facie accepting the contention that the tax department may have lacked jurisdiction to levy GST on the transfer of development rights (TDR).

The bench of Justice B.M. Shyam Prasad has granted an ad-interim stay of the impugned adjudication order.

The petitioner contended that the impugned proceedings arose out of a transaction involving Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) in immovable property, which, according to the company, is not liable to GST in its hands. The company argued that the adjudicating authority had proceeded without jurisdiction by treating the transaction as taxable under Section 74 of the CGST Act.

Appearing for the petitioner, counsel submitted that the company was merely the owner of the land, while the transaction involved a developer, and therefore the GST demand had been wrongly fastened upon the petitioner.

A key submission before the Court was that even if GST were payable on the transaction, the liability would rest upon the developer under the Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM) and not upon the landowner.

The petitioner further argued that the authorities could not have initiated proceedings against it for different tax periods between 2019-20 and 2023-24, as the statutory liability, if any, did not fall upon the petitioner.

The petitioner also informed the Court that in an earlier round of litigation involving the same dispute, the Karnataka High Court had already granted interim protection in W.P. No. 14922/2026. A copy of that interim order was placed on record to support the request for similar protection in the present proceedings.

The Court clarified that the respondents are at liberty to complete their pleadings and seek either vacation of the interim order or an early disposal of the writ petition. Until further orders, however, the interim protection will continue to remain in force.

The matter has been directed to be re-listed on August 12, 2026.

Membership Required to Access Case Details & Order Copy

To view the complete Case Details and Download Order Copy, you must have an active membership. Please subscribe to continue.

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

Read More: Whether GST Audit Officer Can Also Adjudicate Tax Liability? Karnataka High Court Grants Interim Relief 

Nikhil Bhandari
Nikhil Bhandari
Nikhil Bhandari is a Chartered Accountant and a Indirect Tax professional with over 4.5 years of post-qualification experience in tax advisory, compliance management, and tax process optimization. Associated with SDU LLP since August 2015 spanning his articleship through to his current role as Assistant Manager Nikhil has uniquely navigated India’s transition from the legacy tax regime into the GST era.His expertise encompasses both strategic advisory and Indirect Tax litigation, where he represents clients in complex disputes across the manufacturing, service, and e-commerce sectors. By providing high-level counsel to corporate leadership, he ensures that tax positions are not only robust and compliant but also structured for long-term operational efficiency.Beyond his core practice, Nikhil is a proactive contributor to the GST ecosystem. He is dedicated to tracking and analyzing judicial precedents from various High Courts and the Supreme Court, fostering greater clarity and ease of access to tax intelligence for the wider professional community.

Latest articles

Whether GST Audit Officer Can Also Adjudicate Tax Liability? Karnataka High Court Grants Interim Relief 

The Karnataka High Court has granted interim relief in a case raising an important...

GST Demand Seeking Retrospective 28% Tax Rate on Fruit Juice-Based Drinks Stayed: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court stayed the operation of an adjudication order that sought to...

Calcutta High Court Quashes Rs. 87.20 Crore Income Tax Assessment Against PwC Over Denial of Fair Hearing

The Calcutta High Court has quashed an assessment order raising a tax demand of...

DRI Busts Major Gold Smuggling Network; 15 Kg Gold, 45 Kg Silver Worth ₹23 Crore Seized, 15 Arrested

In one of its most significant anti-smuggling operations in recent months, the Directorate of...

More like this

Whether GST Audit Officer Can Also Adjudicate Tax Liability? Karnataka High Court Grants Interim Relief 

The Karnataka High Court has granted interim relief in a case raising an important...

GST Demand Seeking Retrospective 28% Tax Rate on Fruit Juice-Based Drinks Stayed: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court stayed the operation of an adjudication order that sought to...

Calcutta High Court Quashes Rs. 87.20 Crore Income Tax Assessment Against PwC Over Denial of Fair Hearing

The Calcutta High Court has quashed an assessment order raising a tax demand of...