Discussion and Findings. As is seen by the grounds of appeal Xx. Xxxxxxx had numerous complaints relative to the learned judge’s judgment and made many submissions as to findings which he says the learned judge should have made and others which she should not have made. He contended that this court has the ability to set aside those findings which he says were based on errors of facts and law. This jurisdiction he submitted is grounded in Rule 10 (1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2005 which provides as follows:-
Discussion and Findings. 153.The court is of the view that the award on this case should be one on the upper end of similar awards for general damages. In particular, the finds that the pain and suffering would have been tremendous owing to the location of the xxxxx on both hands and face. This of course would have more likely than not affected his ability to sleep on his side and chew. The xxxxx to both hands would have been particularly inconvenient as he would have been deprived of the use of the hands. It is his evidence that at the time of the incident he was in serious pain as he felt like his entire body was on fire, while conscious. At the hospital, his hands were completely covered in bandages and on several days his entire body would have to be covered with rags soaked in ice for several minutes. That to him was of extreme discomfort. In addition to the pain on the face, there was also swelling for two (2) months. The lasting effects are scars on his hands and face and lack of full range of motion in his hands. He is unable to carry things for a long time and his hands become red and burn/xxxxxx or itch.
Discussion and Findings. 23 A. Breach of Contract
Discussion and Findings. 7.1. We have gone through the application and the submissions of the applicant during the personal hearing. The questions to be answered are regarding the rate of tax and taxable value in respect of the construction services of the apartments rendered by them from 01.07.2017; the date of introduction of GST onwards. The practice followed by the applicant is that they purchase the land in their name and obtain a building permit in their name and enter into two agreements with the customers; one for the sale of an undivided share of land and another for the construction of the apartment. Since the amount for the undivided share of land and the amount for construction are fixed and separately available, they are not collecting and paying GST on the amount collected for the undivided share of land and they are collecting GST at the rate of 18% on the amount collected for the construction of the apartment.
7.2. To answer the questions raised by the applicant it is necessary to analyse not only the definitions of various terms under the Notification No. 11/2017 Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 but also the rate structure in respect of the service of construction of residential apartments as notified by Notification No. 11/20 17 Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 before and after its amendment with effect from 01.04.2019 by Notification No. 03/2019 Central Tax (Rate) dated 29.03.2019.
7.3. A new tax structure for the real estate sector was introduced with effect from 01.04.2019 onwards by amendment of Notification No. 11/2017-CT(R) dated 28.06.2017 by Notification No.03/2019-CT(R) dated 29.03.2019. The Notification No.03/2019-CT(R) dated 29.03.2019 substituted the rate for services related to the real estate sector with effect from 01.04.2019 and also made provisions for continuing the old rate of tax (as it existed up to 31.03.2019) for the ongoing projects.
7.4. The provisions for continuing the old rate of tax (as it existed up to 31.03.2019) for the ongoing projects were incorporated in Items (ie) and (if) of Entry at SI. No. 3 of Notification No. 11/2017-CT(R) dated 28.06.2017 as amended. The entries in Item (ie) and (if) of SI. No. 3of Notification No. 11/2017-CT(R) dated 28.06.2017 as amended by Notification No.03/2019-CT(R) dated 29.03.2019 reads as follows;-^ "(ie) Construction of an apartment in an ongoing project under any of the schemes specified in sub-item (b). sub-item (c), sub-item (d), sub-item (da) and sub-item (db) of item (iv); sub-item (b...
Discussion and Findings. The Board, after careful review of the record in this matter, including the Petition, the Agreement, and supporting exhibits, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40A:11-15(1)(c), XXXXXX FINDS the Agreement will have a financial impact that is consistent with the purposes of N.J.S.A. 40A:11-15(1)(c). Accordingly, the Board HEREBY APPROVES the attached Agreement effective June 1, 2023. A copy of the Agreement is attached to this Order.
Discussion and Findings. We have carefully gone through the case details submitted by the party along with annexures and the relevant legal provisions required to answer the questions raised by the applicant. The question which had been posed by the applicant in Sr. No. 14 of Form GST ARA-01, in the context of activity of sale/purchase of Cotton by the applicant, was: "To determine the applicability of GST on the differential payment received by a party to the aforesaid contract from the other party to the contract is (in) event of "settlement", "washout" or "closure" of contract by it. "
Discussion and Findings. We have examined the issues raised in the application. The taxability and the applicable rate of tax for the goods and services supplied or to be supplied, as governed under the provisions of respective GST Acts are examined. The applicant is providing the following supplies to the GVSCCL:
a) Construction of the project
b) Development of the project including plantation, landscaping, Street lighting etc.,
c) Maintenance of the project. The clause (119) of the section (2) of the CGST Act defines 'works Contract' as "a contract: for building, construction, fabrication, completion, erection, installation, fitting out, improvement, modification, repair, maintenance, renovation, alteration or commissioning of any immovable property where in transfer of property in goods (whether as goods or in some other form) is involved in the execution of such contract". The composite supply of works contract as defined at Section 2 of CGST Act, 2017 and APGST Act, 2017 is treated as supply of service in terms of serial No. 6, Schedule II of CGST Act, 2017 and APGST Act, 2017. The "Government Entity" is defined under the explanation at serial no 4(x) of the Notification No.31 Central Tax -Rate dated 13.10.2017 which reads as under:
Discussion and Findings. [24] In considering the issues involved in the case at hand, I do agree, and counsel for Alliance has also conceded, that this is a case that would be appropriate for the determination of the preliminary issue concerning the construction of the guarantee. That enquiry would not lend itself to any dispute as to facts or issues as to credibility that would warrant further investigation at trial. Therefore, it is left to be seen in the final analysis whether this is a case that is fit for judgment to be entered upon a proper construction of the guarantee. I will now proceed to deal with the issues that have arisen in relation to the guarantee. [25] C&WJ’s primary view on Alliance’s stance in refusing to pay the sum demanded is that the refusal constitutes a breach of the guarantee of 30 June 2009. C&WJ’s position is that the “purported objections” raised by Alliance, as its reasons for failing to pay the sums due and owing, constitute cavil or argument and require C&WJ to prove grounds which are expressly excluded from the terms of its own guarantee. Alliance, on the other hand, has denied in its defence that it had undertaken to pay sums due by Reliant to C&WJ without the need for C&WJ to prove or show grounds and that it is liable to pay all sums due and owing without proof, justification or condition. In the light of all this, I have seen it necessary to first examine closely the wording of the guarantee. [26] Having done so, I form the view that in the first paragraph of the letter issued by Alliance, there is what may be loosely described as being more like a ‘preamble’ to the guarantee itself. The words stated in that paragraph are not in the form or nature of an undertaking. It does no more than to show Alliance’s recognition and acceptance of the fact that one of C&WJ’s stipulations in the Interconnection Agreement with Reliant was for Reliant to provide a guarantor for its obligations connected with the agreement. It also points to Alliance indicating that it was pursuant to that stipulation of clause 28.1 that it was giving the undertaking contained in the second paragraph of the letter. It shows, in essence, the recognition by Alliance of the reason for and purpose of the guarantee being given. [27] The terms of the undertaking or guarantee that was given in furtherance of clause 28.1, is, as far as I see it, contained in the second paragraph of the letter. In that paragraph Alliance, in my view, clearly and unambiguously affirmed that it was guara...
Discussion and Findings. Over the course of the hearing, the ZBA heard testimony as summarized in the discussion and findings set forth below.
Discussion and Findings
