GST: Exemptions, Time and Value of Supply — Practice

Question 1

State whether GST applies, and if not, the category of exemption relied on: (a) a hospital's fee for a surgical procedure; (b) a private tutoring centre's coaching fees for a Class 10 board exam preparation course, run independently of any school; (c) bank interest earned on a fixed deposit; (d) a bank's fee for issuing a demand draft.

Accepted Answer

Item (a), the hospital's surgical fee, is exempt, healthcare services by a clinical establishment or an authorised medical practitioner being a specifically exempted category. Item (b), the independent coaching centre's fees, is not exempt and GST applies: the educational services exemption is confined to services provided by an educational institution to its own students, faculty and staff up to and including higher secondary education, and a private coaching centre operating independently of any recognised school or educational institution, merely preparing students externally for board examinations, does not itself qualify as an educational institution for this purpose, however similar its subject matter to what schools teach; this is a frequently tested distinction, since candidates often assume any education-related activity is exempt, when the exemption is tied to the status of the supplier as a recognised educational institution rather than to the general educational character of the service. Item (c), bank interest on a fixed deposit, is exempt, the exemption for financial services specifically covering services by way of extending deposits, loans or advances where the consideration is represented by way of interest or discount. Item (d), the bank's fee for issuing a demand draft, is not exempt and GST applies, because this exemption is narrow and covers only the interest or discount component of financial services; a service fee or commission charged by a bank, such as a demand draft issuance fee, is a fee-based financial service rather than interest or discount income, and falls outside the exemption entirely.

Question 2

Explain the three-way distinction between non-supply, exempt supply and zero-rated supply, with particular attention to input tax credit consequences, illustrating each with one example.

Accepted Answer

The three categories look superficially similar in that none of them results in output GST actually being paid, but they differ fundamentally in whether the transaction is within GST's scope at all and, critically, in their treatment of input tax credit. A non-supply is an activity falling within Schedule III, treated as neither a supply of goods nor a supply of services, meaning it is outside the scope of GST entirely from the outset; no question of input tax credit arises in relation to it because the activity was never within the tax net in the first place, an example being the sale of land, which is simply not a supply under GST at all. An exempt supply is a transaction that does satisfy the definition of supply under section 7 and is within GST's scope, but on which no tax is charged because of a specific exemption notification; the critical consequence is that input tax credit on inputs used to make that exempt supply is not available, and any credit already claimed on such inputs must be reversed, an example being healthcare services, which are a genuine supply but carry no output tax and correspondingly permit no input credit on inputs used to provide them. A zero-rated supply, covering exports and supplies to a Special Economic Zone, is also within GST's scope and taxable in principle, but the applicable rate is effectively nil on the outward supply itself, while input tax credit on inputs used to make that zero-rated supply remains fully available and, where it accumulates because there is no output tax to offset it against, is refundable to the supplier. This is the crucial practical difference from an ordinary exemption: an exporter making zero-rated supplies is not disadvantaged the way a supplier of a merely exempt supply is, since the exporter recovers all input tax through refund, whereas the exempt supplier permanently loses input tax credit on the corresponding inputs.

Question 3

A supplier removes goods for delivery on 5 May, issues the invoice on 8 May, and receives payment on 20 May. Determine the time of supply under the forward charge general rule, and state what would change if the supplier had instead issued the invoice late, on 15 May, when it should have been issued at removal.

Accepted Answer

Under the general rule for time of supply of goods under forward charge, time of supply is the earlier of the date of issue of invoice by the supplier, or the last date by which the invoice should have been issued if it was in fact issued late, and the date of receipt of payment. On the facts as given, the invoice was issued on 8 May, which for goods involving movement is required to be issued at or before the time of removal for supply, and since removal occurred on 5 May, an invoice dated 8 May is itself a few days late relative to that requirement, though the question asks us to take the actual issue date as given for the first scenario. Comparing the invoice date of 8 May against the payment date of 20 May, the earlier of the two is 8 May, so time of supply is 8 May under the facts as stated. Had the supplier instead issued the invoice late, on 15 May, when it should properly have been issued on or before the removal date of 5 May, the rule requires using the last date by which the invoice should have been issued, not the actual later date it was issued, as the relevant comparator; so the relevant first figure becomes 5 May, the required issuance date, rather than 15 May, the actual late issuance date. Comparing 5 May against the payment date of 20 May, the earlier is 5 May, so time of supply would be 5 May in that variant, illustrating that late issuance of an invoice does not defer time of supply, and indeed a supplier cannot benefit from its own delay in invoicing by pushing the time of supply, and therefore the tax payment date, later than the date the invoice should properly have been issued.

Question 4

A consultant provides a service completed on 10 June. Case one: the invoice is issued on 25 June, within the prescribed 30-day period, and payment is received on 5 July. Case two: the invoice is issued on 20 August, beyond the prescribed period, with payment received on the same date. Determine time of supply in each case.

Accepted Answer

The two cases apply different limbs of the time of supply rule for services because the invoice timing relative to the prescribed period differs between them. In case one, the invoice dated 25 June is within the prescribed period of 30 days from the date of supply of service, 10 June, since 25 June falls within that window. Where the invoice is issued within the prescribed period, time of supply is the earlier of the date of invoice and the date of receipt of payment; comparing invoice date 25 June against payment date 5 July, the earlier is 25 June, so time of supply is 25 June. In case two, the invoice is issued on 20 August, well beyond the 30-day prescribed period running from the 10 June date of supply of service, so the invoice has not been issued within the prescribed period. Where the invoice is not issued within the prescribed period, time of supply is instead the earlier of the date of provision of service and the date of receipt of payment; comparing the date of provision of service, 10 June, against the payment date, 20 August, the earlier is 10 June, so time of supply is 10 June, notwithstanding that both the invoice and the payment occurred substantially later. This illustrates the penalty embedded in the rule for late invoicing: failing to invoice within the prescribed period does not defer time of supply to whenever the invoice or payment eventually occurs, but instead reverts to the earlier, underlying date of actual service provision, fixing the tax liability at that earlier point regardless of subsequent administrative delay.

Question 5

A registered company receives legal services from an advocate under reverse charge. The advocate's invoice is dated 1 April. The company enters the liability in its books on 25 April and actually debits its bank account for payment on 3 May. Determine the time of supply under the reverse charge rule for services, and separately state the outcome if the company had made no payment at all by the relevant cutoff.

Accepted Answer

Under reverse charge, time of supply of services is the earlier of the date of payment, taken as the earlier of the date entered in the recipient's books of account or the date the payment is debited from the recipient's bank account, whichever of those two is earlier, and the date immediately following 60 days from the date of issue of invoice by the supplier, applicable if payment has not been made by then. On the facts given, the date entered in the company's books, 25 April, is earlier than the date the bank account was actually debited, 3 May, so the relevant payment date for this comparison is 25 April, being the earlier of the two internal dates. Comparing that 25 April payment date against the 60-days-from-invoice date, which running from the 1 April invoice date falls on 31 May, the earlier of the two overall figures is 25 April, so time of supply is 25 April. Had the company made no payment at all by the relevant cutoff, there being no book entry and no bank debit recorded before the 60-day period from the invoice date expired, time of supply would instead fall on the day immediately following the expiry of 60 days from the invoice date, that is 1 June, being the date the deeming provision fixes as time of supply in the absence of any actual payment event occurring within that window; this ensures that a recipient liable under reverse charge cannot indefinitely defer time of supply, and therefore the tax liability, simply by delaying payment beyond the supplier's invoice.

Question 6

A supplier of goods receives an advance of ₹2,00,000 on 1 March, with the invoice for the full contract value issued on 20 April when the goods are delivered. Separately, a service provider receives an advance of ₹1,50,000 on 1 March for a service to be performed later. State the time of supply treatment for each advance, explaining why they differ.

Accepted Answer

The two advances are treated differently because of a specific relaxation applicable to goods that does not extend to services. Ordinarily, receipt of an advance payment fixes time of supply at the date of receipt, to the extent of the amount received, reflecting the general principle that payment received in advance of a supply is itself an event that can trigger a tax liability on that portion. But this rule has been specifically relaxed for supply of goods: most suppliers of goods are not required to pay tax merely on receipt of an advance, with tax instead payable only at the time otherwise fixed by the general time of supply rule for goods, that is on the earlier of the invoice date and the date of payment computed under that general rule, rather than triggering a separate, earlier liability purely because an advance happened to be received before the invoice. So the goods supplier's advance of 2,00,000 received on 1 March does not by itself fix an earlier time of supply; time of supply for the goods is determined instead by the general rule applied to the eventual invoice, issued on 20 April, so time of supply falls on 20 April, or such earlier date as the general rule for goods would independently fix, without any separate advance-triggered liability arising on 1 March. The service provider's advance, by contrast, is not relieved of the ordinary advance rule, and receipt of the 1,50,000 advance on 1 March itself fixes time of supply, to the extent of that amount, on 1 March, since advances for services continue to trigger time of supply at the date of receipt under the unmodified general position, with the balance of the service value, once eventually invoiced or paid, following the ordinary time of supply rule for services applied to whatever remains.

Question 7

A manufacturer sells goods for a basic price of ₹5,00,000. It separately charges the buyer ₹15,000 for packing and ₹8,000 as interest for a 15-day delayed payment from an earlier invoice, and the transaction is subject to a municipal entry tax of ₹10,000 which the manufacturer collects from the buyer along with the price. Compute the value of supply under section 15, stating the treatment of each item.

Accepted Answer

Section 15's transaction value rule includes several specific items in addition to the basic price, and each must be checked and added where applicable. The basic price of 5,00,000 forms the starting point of value. The packing charge of 15,000 is included, since incidental expenses, including commission and packing, charged by the supplier at the time of or before delivery, are expressly added to value under section 15; packing charged in connection with the supply is not treated as a separate, non-taxable service but as part of the value of the goods supply itself. The interest of 8,000 for delayed payment is also included, since interest, late fee or penalty for delayed payment of consideration is expressly included in value, reflecting that such amounts, though nominally interest, are in substance additional consideration received in connection with the supply and are therefore taxed as part of it rather than treated as a separate exempt financial charge. The municipal entry tax of 10,000, being a tax, duty, cess, fee or charge levied under a law other than the GST laws, is also included in value, since section 15 specifically includes such non-GST levies within the taxable value, on the reasoning that from the buyer's perspective the total amount paid, including this other tax passed through by the supplier, represents the full economic value of the transaction and should bear GST accordingly. Total value of supply is therefore 5,00,000 plus 15,000 plus 8,000 plus 10,000, that is 5,33,000, on which GST is then computed at the applicable rate.

Question 8

A wholesaler grants a 5% discount to a retailer, clearly shown on the invoice at the time of sale. Separately, three months after a set of earlier sales, the wholesaler grants the same retailer a further year-end volume discount of ₹40,000 against those earlier invoices, pursuant to a discount policy that was part of their original distribution agreement signed before any of those sales occurred, with the discount specifically linked to the relevant invoice numbers. Advise on whether each discount reduces value of supply, and the condition that could still defeat the second discount.

Accepted Answer

The first discount, the 5% shown on the invoice at the time of sale, straightforwardly reduces value of supply: a discount given before or at the time of supply, if duly recorded in the invoice, is excluded from value under section 15, and this discount satisfies that condition exactly, being contemporaneous with the sale and shown on the invoice itself, requiring no further conditions to be checked. The second discount, granted three months after the original sales, is a post-supply discount, which is treated more restrictively and is excluded from value only if two further conditions are both satisfied in addition to it being properly documented: it must be established in terms of an agreement entered into before or at the time of supply, and specifically linked to the relevant invoices; and input tax credit attributable to the discount must be reversed by the recipient. On the facts given, the discount does appear to satisfy the agreement-in-advance and invoice-linkage conditions, since it is stated to arise under a distribution agreement signed before any of the relevant sales and is specifically linked to the relevant invoice numbers. But the discount can still be defeated by the third condition, which is not addressed on these facts: the recipient retailer must actually reverse the input tax credit corresponding to the discount amount. If the retailer, having originally claimed full input tax credit on the invoices at their pre-discount value, does not reverse the proportionate credit attributable to the 40,000 discount now granted, the wholesaler cannot treat that discount as reducing value of supply for its own output tax purposes, and the discount, though genuinely paid, remains part of the taxable value; the wholesaler should accordingly obtain confirmation from the retailer that the corresponding credit reversal has been made before excluding this post-supply discount from its own output value.

Question 9

State the sequence of methods used to determine value of supply where the transaction value rule cannot be applied, and give an example of a situation where the transaction value rule would not apply at all.

Accepted Answer

Where the ordinary transaction value rule under section 15 cannot be applied, most commonly because the supplier and recipient are related persons, or because the consideration for the supply is not wholly in money, the valuation rules provide a sequential fallback. The first method is open market value of a supply of like kind and quality, being what the same or a comparable supply would fetch in an ordinary transaction between unrelated parties at the relevant time and place. If open market value is not determinable, the value is taken as the value of supply of goods or services of like kind and quality, a related but distinct test looking at comparable transactions rather than an abstract market value figure. If that too is not determinable, value is computed on a cost basis, being the cost of production or provision of the goods or services plus a notified markup, commonly ten per cent. If none of these methods yields a determinable value, a residual, best-judgment method applies, under which the value is determined using reasonable means consistent with the general principles and objectives of the valuation provisions, essentially an exercise of informed judgment where no more mechanical method can be applied. A situation where the transaction value rule would not apply at all is a related-party transaction: a parent company supplying goods to its wholly owned subsidiary at a price well below what an unrelated buyer would pay cannot rely on the invoiced transaction price as value of supply, since the parties are related and the price may not reflect genuine arm's-length consideration, requiring the sequential fallback methods to be applied instead, subject to the specific simplifying concession available where the recipient is eligible for full input tax credit.

Question 10

A farmer engages a contractor to harvest and store wheat, and separately pays a warehouse operator to store the harvested grain for three months before sale. State the GST treatment of each service, and the reasoning behind the agricultural exemption generally.

Accepted Answer

Both services are exempt from GST. The exemption for agricultural services covers cultivation, harvesting, threshing, storage or warehousing of agricultural produce, along with supply of farm labour and similar services connected to the production of agricultural produce, and both the harvesting service and the subsequent storage service fall squarely within that description; wheat, as an agricultural produce that has undergone no processing altering its essential character, remains within the scope of the exemption through both the harvesting and the storage stage. The reasoning behind exempting agricultural services generally is that agriculture, and particularly the activities of small and marginal farmers, forms a foundational sector of the economy and a source of livelihood for a very large share of the population, much of it operating at a scale where formal GST compliance would be a disproportionate burden; taxing basic agricultural activities such as cultivation, harvesting and storage would also indirectly raise the cost of food staples, which is generally regarded as undesirable from a broad welfare perspective. The exemption is accordingly drawn to cover the core production-and-storage chain for genuinely agricultural produce, while further processing that changes the essential character of the produce, or branding and packaging for retail sale, would generally fall outside the exemption and attract GST in the ordinary way.

Question 11

Mr. Naidu rents out his flat to Ms. Rao for use as her personal residence. Separately, he rents an identical flat to a company that uses it as a guest house for visiting employees on short business trips. Advise on the GST treatment of each rental, stating the exemption and its limits.

Accepted Answer

The rental to Ms. Rao is exempt, while the rental to the company is not. The specific exemption covers renting of residential dwelling for use as residence, and Ms. Rao's occupation is precisely that: she has taken the flat as her own personal residence, satisfying both the character of the property, a residential dwelling, and the character of the use, residence. The rental to the company, though of an identical residential-type flat, does not fall within this exemption, because the use to which the property is put is not residence in the exemption's sense but a business or commercial purpose, namely accommodating employees on short business trips as a guest house; the exemption is understood to be tied to genuine personal residential use rather than to the physical character of the building alone, so a residential-looking property let for commercial accommodation purposes, such as a guest house, a short-term stay arrangement, or business lodging, falls outside the exemption and is taxable. This distinction reflects a broader pattern across GST exemptions where the label attached to a property or activity matters less than the actual purpose it is put to; a residential building does not carry an exemption with it automatically wherever it goes, but only where the specific use genuinely matches the personal-residence purpose the exemption is targeted at.

Question 12

State the rule on when an invoice must be issued for a supply of goods involving movement, as against goods not involving movement, and explain the practical link between this rule and the time of supply computation.

Accepted Answer

Where the supply involves movement of goods, whether by the supplier or on his direction, the invoice must generally be issued at or before the time of removal of the goods for supply to the recipient. Where the supply does not involve movement of goods, such as where the goods are made available to the recipient without being moved, for instance machinery installed at the buyer's premises that is simply handed over in place, the invoice must be issued at or before the time the goods are delivered to the recipient or made available to him. The practical link to time of supply is direct and important: time of supply of goods under the forward charge general rule is the earlier of the date of invoice, or the last date by which the invoice should have been issued if it was in fact issued late, and the date of receipt of payment. Because the required invoice date is fixed by reference to removal or delivery under this separate provision, a supplier cannot manipulate time of supply, and therefore the tax period in which liability falls, by deliberately delaying the actual issuance of the invoice beyond the point of removal or delivery; the rule requiring the last date by which the invoice should have been issued to be used, rather than the actual later issuance date, is what closes this gap, tying the two provisions together so that the mandatory invoicing timeline directly polices the time of supply computation and prevents a supplier from indefinitely deferring liability simply by sitting on an invoice.

Question 13

A fertiliser company sells fertiliser to farmers at ₹800 per bag, receiving a government subsidy of ₹400 per bag directly from the state government to make the product affordable. Separately, an NGO subsidises the same company ₹100 per bag to further reduce the farmer's price. Compute the value of supply per bag, explaining the different treatment of the two subsidies.

Accepted Answer

Section 15 includes subsidies directly linked to the price within the value of supply, but expressly excludes subsidies provided by the Central or State Government from this inclusion, even where such a government subsidy reduces the price actually paid by the recipient. The government subsidy of 400 per bag, being provided by the state government and directly linked to the price the farmer pays, falls within the specific statutory exclusion and is therefore not added back to value; the fertiliser company's price actually charged to the farmer, 800 per bag, already reflects the subsidised price, and no further addition is made to value on account of the government subsidy component. The NGO subsidy of 100 per bag is different: it is a price-linked subsidy from a source other than the Central or State Government, and such non-government price-linked subsidies are included in value of supply rather than excluded, since the general inclusion rule for price-linked subsidies applies to any subsidy meeting that description except specifically government subsidies. Value of supply per bag is therefore the price actually charged, 800, plus the non-government subsidy of 100 that reduced what the farmer would otherwise have paid, giving a value of supply of 900 per bag, on which GST is computed, even though the farmer's own out-of-pocket price is only 800; the reasoning is that the total economic consideration received by the supplier for the bag, from all sources combined, is genuinely 900, made up of 800 from the farmer directly and 100 from the NGO on the farmer's behalf, and only the government's own portion of subsidy support is deliberately excluded from that total for policy reasons specific to government-funded price support schemes.

Question 14

A parent company supplies components to its wholly owned subsidiary at an invoiced value of ₹40,00,000, while the open market value of comparable components is estimated at ₹55,00,000. The subsidiary is eligible for full input tax credit on this purchase. State the value of supply to be adopted, and the reasoning behind the concession that applies.

Accepted Answer

The value of supply to be adopted is the invoiced value of 40,00,000, notwithstanding that this is well below the estimated open market value of 55,00,000, because of a specific simplifying concession applicable to supplies between related or distinct persons. The general rule for related-party transactions would ordinarily require value to be determined through the sequential fallback methods, starting with open market value, precisely because a related-party invoice price cannot be presumed to be a genuine arm's-length figure and might understate true value to reduce output tax. But where the recipient of such a supply is eligible for full input tax credit on the purchase, the value declared in the invoice is deemed to be the open market value, dispensing with the need to independently establish and apply an actual open market value figure. The reasoning behind this concession is that where the recipient can claim full input tax credit, there is no revenue-loss incentive for the related parties to understate value: whatever value is used, the supplier's output tax on that value is exactly matched by the recipient's corresponding input credit, so the two entirely offset each other from the government's revenue perspective regardless of what figure is chosen, and there is consequently no practical benefit to be gained by artificially manipulating the invoiced price between two related entities where full credit flows through. The concession accordingly relieves both parties of the burden of independently establishing open market value in this specific situation, since doing so would serve no revenue protection purpose.

Question 15

A service provider issues an invoice for ₹6,00,000 on 10 September for a service supplied on 1 September, within the prescribed invoicing window, and separately charges ₹20,000 for out-of-pocket expenses incurred on the client's behalf that were not included in the original quoted price, along with a 2% discount duly shown on the same invoice. Payment of the net amount is received on 25 September. Determine the time of supply and compute the value of supply.

Accepted Answer

On time of supply, the invoice dated 10 September is within the prescribed 30-day period from the 1 September date of supply of service, so time of supply under the forward charge rule for services is the earlier of the date of invoice and the date of receipt of payment; comparing 10 September against the payment date of 25 September, the earlier is 10 September, so time of supply is 10 September. On value of supply, start from the basic quoted price of 6,00,000. The out-of-pocket expenses of 20,000, described as incurred on the client's behalf and not included in the original price, must be examined against the specific inclusion for any amount the supplier is liable to pay but which has been incurred by the recipient and not included in the price, or conversely amounts the recipient was liable for that the supplier paid; on the facts as most naturally read, these appear to be costs the supplier incurred in connection with providing the service that were then separately recovered from the client, which are properly added to value as incidental expenses charged by the supplier in connection with the supply, rather than genuine third-party disbursements made strictly as the client's own agent that might be excluded as a pure reimbursement in narrower circumstances; on that basis the 20,000 is included, giving a running total of 6,20,000. The 2% discount, being duly shown on the invoice at the time of supply, is excluded from value under the pre-supply discount rule, which requires only that it be recorded on the invoice with no further conditions; 2% of 6,20,000 is 12,400, so value of supply is 6,20,000 less 12,400, that is 6,07,600, and GST is computed on that figure regardless of when the 25 September payment is actually received, since the value computation and the time of supply computation are independent exercises answering different questions.

Practice — GST: Exemptions, Time and Value of Supply

Sign in to save attempts to your dashboard and track your accuracy over time

Find a verified tutor

Join a live course

Browse coaching centres

About

Categories

Support

Documentation

Get Study Tips & Updates

Download Our App

Download for iOS

Download for Android

Popular Cities