9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 436X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mmissioner (Appeals) held that the appellant is providing intermediary services in terms of Rule 2(f) of Place of Provision of Rules, 2012, therefore, as per Rule 9 of the said Rules, location of service provider is the place of provider of service, hence the appellant was required to pay service tax under reverse charge mechanism. Therefore, the appellant cannot refund of Cenvat credit lying unutilized in their Cenvat account. Against the said order, the appeal is before us. 3. The Ld. Counsel for the appellants submits that for the subsequent period in appellant's own case this Tribunal has already allowed the refund claim by vide final order No. 60151/2018 dated 27.02.2018, therefore, the impugned order is to be set aside and appeal be allowed. 4. Heard the parties, considering the fact that on the identical issue in the appellant's own case of the subsequent period this Tribunal has observed as under:- "6. Before going through the legal aspect of the case. first we have to see terms of the agreement between the appellant and the Evalueserve Ltd., Bermuda which are reproduced here under: 1.A The Company shall provide the services to the customers of the client in accordan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccount holders; (b) Online information and database access or retrieval services; (c) Intermediary services." 10. As per Rule 2(f) of the Rules Intermediary means a broker, an agent or any other person, by whatever name called, who arranges or facilitates a provision of a service (hereinafter called the "main" service) or a supply of goods, between two or more persons, but does not include a person who provides the main service or supplies the goods on his account. 11. On going through the agreement placed before us, the appellants are themselves engaged in providing of services to their client and the facilitating their clients for providing those services by third party. In that circumstance, it is to be seen whether the provider of services is covered as intermediary or not. We have gone through the impugned order also. In the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) has fell in error holding that the appellant provided services on behalf of Evalueserve Ltd., Bermuda. In fact, the appellant has provided the services to customers of their Client and having no direct nexus with the customers of their client has been provided by the appellant to their client and nowhe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ness in India. Therefore, these services proposed to be provided by the applicant, would support the business interests of GoDaddy US in India. 12. It has been submitted by the applicant that services to be provided by the applicant are not peculiar only in applicant's case but are provided by various Indian entities to their overseas customers in India as a single package. Further, supporting the business of GoDaddy US in India is the main service and processing payments and oversight of services of third party Call Centers are ancillary and incidental to the provision of main service, i.e., business support service. Further, applicant would provide said services as a package and the payment for the entire package would be a consolidated lump sum payment. Applicant submits that in view of all these indicators, service provided by them to GoDaddy US is a bundle of services, which is bundled in normal course of business. This point has not been controverted by the Revenue. We agree with the submissions of the applicant that proposed services are a bundle of services, bundled in normal course of business and not intermediary service. 13. In view of above, we rule as under; I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... & international air tickets to its customer in USA. Further the services provided by LBF are services in an integral manner to assist LBF Travel Inc. To increase its sales and reservations, carry on its operations efficiently and serve its customers, which are as under: Call centre service: (i) Attending Calls; (ii) Processing Reservations; (iii) Processing Payments. Thus in LBF is not falling under the definition of intermediary and shall not fall under Rule of the Place of Provisions Rules, 2012. In order to support their contentions, they relied upon the illustrations given on pave NO.69 under paragraph .5.9.6 of the "Taxation of Services: An Education Guide" issued by Central Board of Excise & Customs. Relevant portion is extracted as under: "Similarly, persons such as call centres, who provide services to their clients by dealing with the customers of the client on the client's behalf, but actually provided these services on their own account, will not be categorized as intermediaries". Reliance can also be placed on the ruling of Authority for Advance Ruling (Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax), New Delhi on the application of M/s. GoDaddy India Web Services Pvt. Ltd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
