Case Details: Chief Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax v. Safari Retreats Pvt. Ltd. (2025) 30 Centax 350 (S.C.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Abhay S. Oka & Sanjay Karol, JJ.
Facts of the Case
The Revenue filed a review petition against the Supreme Court’s earlier judgment which had held that buildings such as malls, when used as an essential part of providing taxable services, could be treated as ‘plant’ for the purpose of availing input tax credit (ITC) under the CGST Act. The original judgment had applied the ‘functionality test’ to determine whether such immovable property qualifies as a plant and is thus excluded from the bar under Section 17(5)(d).
Supreme Court Held
The Supreme Court dismissed the review petition, finding no error in its earlier decision. It reaffirmed that if a building is essential for carrying out business activities and satisfies the functionality test, it can be treated as ‘plant’, making ITC available despite the general restriction under Section 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act. The ruling was upheld in favour of the assessee.
List of Cases Reviewed
- Chief Commissioner v. Safari Retreats Pvt. Ltd. — [2024] 23 Centax 62/[2024] 167 taxmann.com 73 (SC) — Affirmed [Paras 3]
