HomeGSTGST Dilemma After Supreme Court Classifies 'Mortgagor' As 'Guarantor' 

GST Dilemma After Supreme Court Classifies ‘Mortgagor’ As ‘Guarantor’ 

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Supreme Court has classified ‘Mortgagor’ as ‘Guarantor’.

The bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Pankaj Mithal has observed that if after the sale of hypothecated assets, there is any shortfall in the discharge of the liabilities of the Corporate Debtor is under an obligation to pay the shortfall or deficiency. Therefore, the Corporate Debtor, who is not the borrower, agreed to discharge the liability of the third parties in the case of default. Therefore, it amounts to a guarantee provided by the Corporate Debtor to the appellants in terms of Section 126 of the Contract Act.

The bench held that the mortgagor, who was not a direct borrower, assumed the responsibility of discharging the liability of third parties in the event of their default. This obligation to pay the shortfall was deemed a guarantee.

‘Mortgagor’ As ‘Guarantor’ : GST Implications & Confusion

No GST is applicable on mortgage. However, the GST on corporate guarantees is 18%, with an HSN Code of 999799. GST on corporate guarantee is calculated as 1% of the guarantee amount if no fee is charged or on the actual fee when one exists.

The Supreme Court’s ruling classifies the transaction as both a mortgage and a guarantee, but GST applicability requires further examination. This raises questions about GST implications for such transactions, especially in corporate guarantee arrangements.

Read More: 6% Excise Duty Payable On Railway Diesel Locomotive: CESTAT

Case Details

Case Title: China Development Bank versus Doha Bank Q.P.S.C. & Ors.

Case No.: Civil Appeal No. 7298 Of 2022

Date: 20/12/2024

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

Whether ‘May’ Can Replace Mandatory Pre-SCN Consultation? Punjab & Haryana High Court Stays Final GST Adjudication 

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted interim protection to a taxpayer challenging...

Bank Certificate Can Substitute FIRC in GST Export Cases: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has held that GST authorities cannot mechanically confirm tax demands...

GST SCN Without Alleging Fraud Cannot Invoke S. 74: Karnataka High Court Quashes Adjudication Order

The Karnataka High Court has held that proceedings under Section 74 of the Central...

GST SCN Generated Using AI Tool Quashed: Punjab & Haryana High Court 

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has quashed a GST Show Cause Notice (SCN)...

More like this

Whether ‘May’ Can Replace Mandatory Pre-SCN Consultation? Punjab & Haryana High Court Stays Final GST Adjudication 

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted interim protection to a taxpayer challenging...

Bank Certificate Can Substitute FIRC in GST Export Cases: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has held that GST authorities cannot mechanically confirm tax demands...

GST SCN Without Alleging Fraud Cannot Invoke S. 74: Karnataka High Court Quashes Adjudication Order

The Karnataka High Court has held that proceedings under Section 74 of the Central...