Treatment of supply by an artist in various states and supply of goods by artists from galleries

CLARIFICATION ON ISSUES REGARDING TREATMENT OF SUPPLY BY AN ARTIST IN VARIOUS STATES AND SUPPLY OF GOODS BY ARTISTS FROM GALLERIES

In case of work of art given to galleries, Treatment of taxability in the hands of the artist when the handover to art galleries or at the time of actual supplies by the galleries, how will it be treated as supply of goods by artists.

Clarification about supply of goods by artists is given below:

As per combined reading of

Rule55(1)(c ): Delivery challan shall be issued for transportation of goods where such transportation is for reason other than supply.

Rule55(3): Such delivery challan shall be declared as per Rule 138

Rule55(4): Tax invoice shall be issued after supply in case such invoice could not be issued at the time of supply

  1. Artwork for supply or supply of goods by artists can be moved on an approval basis along with delivery challan and an e-way bill to the same state or outside the state and the invoice may be issued at the time of actual supply of artwork.
  2. In case inter-state supplies, IGST would be attracted.

CIRCULAR NO.22/22/2017-GST [F.NO.349/58/2017-GST]DATED 21-12-2017

Various representations have been received regarding taxation of the supply of art works by artists in different States other than the State in which they are registered as a taxable person. In such cases, if the art work is selected by the buyer, then the supplier issues a tax invoice only at the time of supply. It has been represented that the artists give their work of art to galleries where it is exhibited for supply. There seems to be confusion regarding the treatment of this activity whether it is taxable in the hands of the artist when the same is given to the art gallery or at the time of actual supply by the gallery. Therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred under section 168(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, for the purpose of uniformity in the implementation of the Act, it has been decided to clarify this matter.

2. It is seen that clause (c) of sub-rule (1) of rule 55 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (hereafter referred as “the said Rules”) provides that the supplier shall issue a delivery challan for the initial transportation of goods where such transportation is for reasons other than by way of supply. Further, sub-rule (3) of the said rule provides that the said delivery challan shall be declared as specified in rule 138 of the said Rules. It is also seen that sub-rule (4) of rule 55 of the said Rules provides that where the goods being transported are for the purpose of supply to the recipient but the tax invoice could not be issued at the time of removal of goods for the purpose of supply, the supplier shall issue a tax invoice after delivery of goods.

3. A combined reading of the above provisions indicates that the art work for supply on approval basis can be moved from the place of business of the registered person (artist) to another place within the same State or to a place outside the State on a delivery challan along with the e-way bill wherever applicable and the invoice may be issued at the time of actual supply of art work.

4. It is also clarified that the supplies of the art workfrom one State to another State will be inter-State supplies and attract integrated tax in terms of section 5 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

5. It is further clarified that in case of supply by artists through galleries, there is no consideration flowing from the gallery to the artist when the art works are sent to the gallery for exhibition and therefore, the same is not a supply. It is only when the buyer selects a particular art work displayed at the gallery, that the actual supply takes place and applicable GST would be payable at the time of such supply.

6. It is requested that suitable trade notices may be issued to publicize the contents of this circular.

7. Difficulty, if any, in the implementation of the above instructions may please be brought to the notice of the Board.

Learn more about E Way Bill – Uttar Pradesh

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed are strictly of the author and VJM & Associates LLP. The contents of this article are solely for informational purpose. It does not constitute professional advice or recommendation of firm. Neither the author nor firm and its affiliates accepts any liabilities for any loss or damage of any kind arising out of any information in this article nor for any actions taken in reliance thereon.

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
WhatsApp
Related Post
MCA imposed Penalty for failure to issue and transfer shares in Demat form
Others
CA. Kavit Vijay

MCA imposed Penalty for failure to issue and transfer shares in Demat form

As per Section 29(1A) of Companies Act read with Rule 9A of The Companies (Prospectus and Allotment of Securities) Rules, 2014, every unlisted public company shall ensure that before issuance of any securities entire holding of securities of its promoters, directors, key managerial personnel has been dematerialised in accordance with provisions of the Depositories Act 1996. Further,  every shareholder of an unlisted public company is required to dematerialise its securities before transfer, if such transfer is made on or after 2nd October, 2018.

Read More »
Proceedings can’t be initiated under Section 74 when tax liability is already discharged along with interest
Judgements
CA. Sachin Jindal

Proceedings can’t be initiated under Section 74 when tax liability is already discharged along with interest

The petitioner is engaged in the business of generation of electricity through solar plants. The GST returns filed by the petitioner for the period of July, 2017 to March, 2019 were subject to audit. The petitioner was informed about tax liability during audit proceedings on account of wrong availment of ITC and ITC availed with respect to exempted supply. Upon receipt of initial audit observation, the petitioner discharged the entire tax liability alongwith interest. The final audit report was issued much after payment of GST liability. Post audit, the respondent issued show cause notice to the petitioner under Section 74 of CGST Act and confirmed the demand through DRC-07. The petitioner contended that it falls under purview of Section 73(1) and 73(5) of CGST Act and therefore, SCN under section 74 is not sustainable. Whereas, the respondent contended that this is the case of fraud and willful misstatement.

Read More »

V J M & Associates LLP

Contact Us

X