TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 1005X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Germany and Esprit Hong Kong and for that purpose an agreement was made between Esprit Hong Kong and Esprit India (appellant). The appellant is providing the services of market research and assisting in trade mark protection, identification of supplies and inspection and quality control of the goods/services. Therefore, we find that the AAR has rightly identified the SAC description with rate of tax - After perusing the provisions of Section 97(2) and going through the findings of AAR, we are of the view that Question 2 and 3, raised by the applicant, have rightly been declined by the AAR. There is no hesitation in dismissing the appeal - the Advance ruling decision does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality and the same is upheld. - HAAAR/2018-19/02 - - - Dated:- 22-11-2018 - AMIT KUMAR AGRAWAL AND MANORANJAN KAUR VIRK, MEMBER Appellant Represented by: Sh. Nitin Agrawal, Power of Attorney Holder, M/s. Esprit India Pvt. Ltd. Department Represented by: Sh. Amreshwar Gautam, Asstt. Commissioner Sh. S.K. Saini, Jt. Director(Legal) Order under Section 101 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/the Haryana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oods for Esprit Germany. 2. Purchase of goods and trademark protection Esprit Germany directly purchases goods from Indian suppliers Esprit India performs its functions as sub sourcing contractor of EDCFE and does not purchase the goods or trade in its own name. It assists in protection of trademark which includes ensuring that all suppliers execute all trademark confirmation letters, comply with the trademark protection procedures and comply with the sourcing principles as adopted by Esprit Germany/EDCFE. 3. Identification of suppliers EDCFE provide guidelines and instructions to Esprit India regarding vendor selection process. Esprit India responsible for collecting data for the purpose of vendor evaluation. Esprit India undertakes vendor evaluation on various parameters including experience, reputation, quality of product, price etc. based on which the vendor is selected. Esprit India is also responsible for maintaining the existing and new supplier base in India. 4. Negotiation with the suppliers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. C. The Ld. AAR had arbitrarily and erroneously held that the questions asked by the Appellant were out of the scope of the Section 97(2) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 (CGST Act) /Haryana Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 (HGST Act) and the questions could not be taken up by the AAR due to lack of jurisdiction. D. Services provided by the Appellant were not intermediary services. The Appellant in no manner arranged or facilitated sale of Goods from vendors in India to Esprit Germany The Appellant does not qualify as an agent or a broker for EDCFE E. The services performed by the Appellant are in nature of support services F. Services in the present case are indeed exported. Services provided by the Appellant would qualify as exports in terms of Section 2 (6) of Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 (the IGST Act). G. The remuneration of the Appellant for support services to EDCFE is independent of purchase of goods by Esprit Germany from India. H. The Ld. AAR has erred both in law and facts while passing the Impugned Order on assumptions and presumptions which is against the facts and the provisions of law ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s rightly answered all the three questions covered within the ambit of Section 97(2), wherein the Act has limited the powers of Authority for Advance Ruling. In this regard, they have referred Section 97(2) which is as under:- (2) The question on which the advance ruling is sought under this Act, shall be in respect of, (a) classification of any goods or services or both; (b) applicability of a notification issued under the provisions of this Act; (c) determination of time and value of supply of goods or services or both; (d) admissibility of input tax credit of tax paid or deemed to have been paid; (e) determination of the liability to pay tax on any goods or services or both; (f) whether applicant is required to be registered; (g) whether any particular thing done by the applicant with respect to any goods or services or both amounts to or results in a supply of goods or services or both, within the meaning of that term. To controvert the cited authorities of other States, it is pleaded by the department that the same are not binding on the appellant and in support of this argument, the provisions of Section 103 have been referee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
