9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 752X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers money from his account in convertible foreign currency which is then remitted to the service provider, the same is sufficient compliance with Export of Service Rules. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - Appeal No. ST/42377/2018 - FINAL ORDER No. 40415/2019 - Dated:- 22-1-2019 - Shri P. Dinesha, Member (Judicial) Shri L. Nandakumar, AC (AR) for the Appellant Shri S. Prashant Sai, Advocate for the Respondent ORDER The assessee is a service provider, providing Consulting Engineering Services , Maintenance or Repair Services in the field of automotive, aerospace and advance manufacturing industries. 2. The assessee has entered into a Distributor Agreement with its principals viz., M/s. Siemens Indus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the OIO and the demand therein. The Commissioner of CE GST, Audit-II Commissionerate, Chennai, in the impugned order has held that the service was no doubt covered under BAS and Rule 3 (iii) of the Export of Services Rules, for category (iii) services BAS, destination is to be decided based on the place of consumption and the place of performance of the service. He further holds following the decisions of the Hon ble Bombay High Court in i) CST, Mumbai Vs. Maersk India Pvt. Ltd. 2015 (38) STR 1121 (Bom.), ii) CST Mumbai-II Vs., SGS India Pvt. Ltd. 2014 (34) STR 554 (Bom.) and iii) CST Vs. AVL India Ltd. 2017 (4) GSTL 59 (Tri.-Del.), iv) Paul Merchants Ltd. Vs. CCE, Chandigarh 2013 (29) STR 257 (Tri.-Del.), v) Sumitomo Corporati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ision of service by virtue of the Distributor Agreement to a foreign entity is not disputed. Further, on a perusal of SCN and OIO, I do not find any whisper about any understanding as to the provision of service between the assessee and the end user. In view of the above factual background and on going through various decisions supra, I find that identical issue has been considered and already decided. 8. On the other hand, Ld. DR was unable to distinguish the applicability of the above case laws to the case on hand nor was he able to place any contrary decision/order to take a different view. In view thereof and following the ratio decidendi of the above cases, appeal do not survive and hence the same is dismissed. (Operative part of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
