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 - 2021 (1) TMI AAR This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2021 (1) TMI 544 - AAR - GST


Issues Involved:
1. Classification of the specified transaction as individual or composite supply.
2. Determination of the recipient of the specified transaction.
3. Categorization of the specified transaction as an intermediary service.
4. Qualification of the specified transaction as an export of service.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Classification of the Specified Transaction as Individual or Composite Supply
The applicant, engaged in the textile and graphics printing market, provides services including installation, upgrades, and training for machines sold by SPA. The applicant contends that these services are independent and separate, with distinct consideration based on hourly rates for different activities. The definition of "composite supply" under Section 2(30) of the CGST Act, 2017, requires that the supplies be naturally bundled and supplied in conjunction with each other, with one being a principal supply. The Authority concluded that the services provided by the applicant (installation, upgrades, training, etc.) are naturally bundled and supplied in conjunction with each other in the ordinary course of business, thus qualifying as a composite supply.

Issue 2: Determination of the Recipient of the Specified Transaction
The applicant argued that SPA, who pays for the services, should be considered the recipient. However, the Authority referred to Section 2(93) of the CGST Act, 2017, which defines the recipient as the person to whom the supply is made and who is liable to pay the consideration. The Authority concluded that the recipient of the service is the Indian customer to whom the service is supplied, as the supply is inseparable from the foreign buyer.

Issue 3: Categorization of the Specified Transaction as an Intermediary Service
The term "intermediary" is defined under Section 2(13) of the IGST Act, 2017, as a person who arranges or facilitates the supply of goods or services between two or more persons but does not include a person who supplies such goods or services on his own account. The Authority examined the agreement between the applicant and SPA, noting that the applicant acts on behalf of SPA, coordinating with SPA's area coordinator, and providing services as per SPA's instructions. The Authority determined that the applicant's role fits the definition of an intermediary, as they facilitate the supply of services between SPA and its customers in India.

Issue 4: Qualification of the Specified Transaction as an Export of Service
Section 2(6) of the IGST Act, 2017, defines "export of services" and requires that the recipient of the service be located outside India and the place of supply be outside India. The Authority concluded that the recipient of the service is the Indian customer, and the place of supply, as per Section 13(8) of the IGST Act, is the location of the supplier (India). Since the conditions for export of services are not met, the specified transaction does not qualify as an export of service.

Ruling:
1. The specified transaction is a composite supply of service.
2. The recipient of the specified transaction is the Indian customer.
3. The specified transaction is categorized as an intermediary service.
4. The specified transaction does not qualify as an export of service.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates