Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + AAR GST - 2019 (3) TMI AAR This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2019 (3) TMI 656 - AAR - GST


Issues Involved:
1. Determination of GST liability by deciding the principal supply of the composite supply in maintenance contracts executed between the customer and the Applicant.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Determination of GST liability by deciding the principal supply of the composite supply in maintenance contracts executed between the customer and the Applicant:

The Applicant, Cummins India Limited, sought an advance ruling to determine the GST liability by identifying the principal supply in the composite supply under their Annual Maintenance Contracts (AMC). The Applicant is engaged in manufacturing diesel and natural gas engines and providing after-sales services, including maintenance services, supply of spare parts, and other related services.

Applicant's Contentions:
The Applicant argued that the AMCs involved a composite supply, comprising both services and goods, where the principal supply should be identified to determine the applicable tax structure. They referred to the definitions under the CGST Act, specifically Sections 2(30) and 2(90), which define 'composite supply' and 'principal supply,' respectively. The Applicant contended that the dominant intention of the AMC is to provide maintenance services, with the supply of parts being ancillary. They supported their argument with past judicial precedents, emphasizing that the primary object of the contract is the provision of services, not the transfer of property in goods.

Concerned Officer's Contentions:
The concerned officer examined the Applicant's submissions and the AMC agreements, noting that the predominant element of the AMC is the supply of services. The officer highlighted that the primary obligation of the Applicant is to ensure the equipment's uptime, provide preventive maintenance, and carry out necessary repairs, with the supply of consumables and small parts being incidental.

Observations and Findings:
The Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) reviewed the facts and submissions, noting that the AMC agreements involve rendering maintenance services along with the supply of necessary parts. The AAR referred to the definition of 'composite supply' under Section 2(30) of the CGST Act, confirming that the AMC constitutes a composite supply. They further analyzed the definition of 'principal supply' under Section 2(90) and concluded that the predominant intention of the AMC is to provide maintenance services, with the supply of parts being incidental.

The AAR determined that the principal supply in the AMC is the supply of services. Consequently, the place of supply would be the location of the recipient, as per Section 12(2) of the IGST Act. The location of the supplier would be Maharashtra, where the Applicant is registered.

Conclusion:
The AAR concluded that the principal supply in the maintenance contracts between the Applicant and the customer is the supply of services. The supply of goods is incidental to the supply of services, making the entire transaction a composite supply of services. The GST liability should be determined accordingly, with the place of supply being the location of the recipient and the supplier's location being Maharashtra.

Order:
The principal supply in the present case between the Applicant and the customer is one of the supply of services.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates