The Central GST Act, 2017 (GST Act), specifically
provides that ‘works contract’ as well as ‘construction
of a complex or a building, civil structure or a part
thereof’ shall be treated as the supply of services.
Even though this provision will provide clarity to a
great extent, it may not be able to eliminate ambiguity
completely. Contracts in the infrastructure sector can
be quite complex, and determining the nature of these
contracts would be difficult.
Under the previous regime, a majority of construction
contracts, being work contracts, were subject to a
combination of both service tax and VAT. A service tax
of around 4.5% (assuming taxable component of the
service contract is 30%) and VAT ranging from 1-15%,
depending upon the state, was applicable to construction
contracts.
Thus, under the earlier regime, the effective tax
incidence for an average construction contract, ranged
from 11-18%. Moreover, there were several construction
activities, such as the construction of roads, dams,
irrigation, that were exempt from service tax.
With the rollout of GST, the rate of 18% for works
contracts is higher, and the difference is more
prominent for construction activities falling under the
service tax exemption category. However, this higher GST
rate could be set off by the benefit of input tax paid
and ITC on the raw materials. On the other hand, a
higher GST rate could also result in higher costs, if
there is limited scope for renegotiating construction
contracts, and contracts that do not account for
contingency factors.
The cost of construction services will also be impacted
due to credit restrictions provided under Section 17(5)
of the GST Act. According to the aforesaid section, a
contractor will not get ITC for the supply of works
contract service for construction of an immovable
property but can avail the benefit of ITC on
construction services availed from the sub-contractor.
Furthermore, the aforesaid section also provides that
ITC shall not be available for goods or services or both
received by a taxable person for construction of an
immovable property (other than plant or machinery) on
his own account, used in the course or furtherance of
business. Thus, these provisions are complicated and
contradictory.
We can see that implementation of the above-mentioned
credit restrictions can have an adverse impact on the
infrastructure sector. However, this does not seem to be
the intent of the lawmakers, as seen from the ‘Schedule
of GST Rates’, which clearly provides that full ITC will
be available for the composite supply of works
contracts. Thus, we cannot conclude that higher GST rate
on works contracts will be neutralised by ITC until
explanation and clarity are sought with respect to the
aforesaid credit restrictions.
GST would also make compliance easier by eliminating
multiple indirect taxes. However, it would require
contractors to register in multiple states owing to the
requirement of registering at the place of supply of
service. Contractors would also have to compulsorily
register in a state where it supplies services but has
no fixed place of business, owing to the concept of
“casual taxable person”. These provisions will increase
the compliance costs for construction companies.
Furthermore, companies will have to incur the costs of
upgrading their IT systems, as input credit would be
available only after an online reconciliation of tax
invoices.
With the advent of GST, there will also be a change in
the cost of construction materials. For example, a
higher GST rate of 28% imposed upon cement would
adversely impact construction cost. Similarly,
electricity is not within the ambit of GST and input tax
will be an additional burden for the infrastructure
industry.
We cannot conclusively comment on the impact of higher
GST rate on the infrastructure sector, as there is still
ambiguity with respect to credit restrictions. GST will
boost the sector by eliminating multiple taxes and
simplifying the law, but it will also impact the cost of
goods and services used in construction and increase
compliance costs. It is still very early to make a
judgment on the new tax reform. We should wait till it
concretises.
Source::: Financial Express,
dated 11/07/2017.