Bombay High Court Grants Interim Relief in GST Dispute Over Real Estate Revenue Sharing Arrangement

The Bombay High Court has granted interim relief in the GST dispute over real estate revenue sharing arrangement.

The bench of Justice B. P. Colabawalla and Justice Firdosh P. Pooniwalla has directed the department to file the affidavit on the issue whether the revenue sharing arrangement under a development agreement entered into by the Petitioner with L & T Asian Realty Project LLP would be a supply of service and hence exigible to GST, within a period of two weeks.

The Petitioner, Nirmal Lifestyle Developers Pvt. Ltd. is filed seeking a declaration that the development rights under a revenue sharing arrangement are not a “supply” of services, leviable to GST under Section 7 read with Section 9 of the CGST Act and the transfer and development rights as “sale of land” are beyond the scheme of taxation under the GST Laws in terms of Articles 246 and 246A of the Constitution and under Section 7 read with Section 9 and Schedule III of the CGST Act. 

The other relief sought in the present Writ Petition is also to quash and set aside the Order-in-Original dated 2nd January, 2025 issued in Form DRC-07 .

The issue in the present Writ Petition is whether the revenue sharing arrangement under a development agreement entered into by the Petitioner with L & T Asian Realty Project LLP would be a supply of service and hence exigible to GST.

The court noted that the issue is similar, though not identical, to the issue that was raised before the Gujarat High Court wherein the Gujarat High Court considered whether an assignment of a lease would fall within Schedule II of the CGST Act. The Gujarat High Court,in fact, took a view that an assignment by the original lessee to a third party would not fall within Schedule II and hence, would not be taxable under the GST Law. 

The Gujarat High Court came to the conclusion that the assignment was actually a transfer of immovable property and hence no exigible to GST. 

The court held that it is the case of the Petitioner that there is no transfer at all. Even if one would assume that there is a transfer, the same would be of immovable property and not taxable under the GST Law. 

Case Details

Case Title: Nirmal Lifestyle Developers Pvt. Ltd., Versus The Union of India & Others

Case No.: Writ Petition (L)No.11011 Of 2025

Date: APRIL 09, 2025

Counsel For Petitioner: Adv. Prakash Shah, Sr. Advocate with Adv. Mihir Mehta and Adv. Jas Sanghavi 

Counsel For Respondent: Adv. Subir Kumar with Adv. Niyanta Trivedi

Read More: Designation of Senior Advocates in India: Procedure, Reforms, and Persistent Biases

Mariya Paliwala
Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You May Also Like
recovery during pending adjudication

Recovery During Pendency Of Investigation Against Article 265 Of Constitution; Karnataka High Court Directs Rs.2.50 Crores Refund

The Karnataka High Court has held that the recovery during pending adjudication…

Limitation Period For Challenging GST Assessment Order Starts Ticking From The Date Of Rectification Application Rejection: Madras High Court 

The Madras High Court has held that the limitation period for challenging…

GST Registration Made Mandatory for Online Sellers from Day One

E-commerce sellers must register for GST from the first day of operations; service providers may be exempt under specific conditions.
Human Error In Mentioning Place Of Delivery In E-Way Bill: Allahabad High Court Quashes Penalty Under GST

Human Error In Mentioning Place Of Delivery In E-Way Bill: Allahabad High Court Quashes Penalty Under GST

The Allahabad High Court quashed the penalty under GST while stating that…