TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 522X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es and an Indian importer of an equipment is not an export of service. Said supply will be treated as inter-state supply and IGST will be levied @18%. In the instant case the intermediary services are provided to the recipient located outside India and the Interstate provisions as contained under Section 7 (5) (c) shall be applicable and hence IGST is payable under such transaction. - AAR No. 02/AP/GST/2021 - - - Dated:- 11-1-2021 - SRI. D. RAMESH, AND SRI. A. SYAM SUNDAR, MEMBER Represented by : Sri K.V.J.L.N. Sastry, Advocate ORDER (Under Sub-Section (4) of Section 98 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and sub- section (4) of Section 98 of Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017) 1. At the outset ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sultants and distributors. The applicant claims that only marketing consultancy service is being done by them in India on behalf of foreign company and their billing is directly done to foreign company in foreign currency and paid by inward remittance. Moreover it is argued that they are neither giving any service to Indian client nor having any agreement or payment to them. In light of the above the applicant approached the authority for advance ruling for the clarification whether his services can be clubbed under export of service. Brief History of the case: The applicant had filed an application in form GST ARA-01, Dt:17.07.2019, by paying required amount of fee for seeking Advance Ruling on the following issue, as mentioned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sentative Sri KVJLN Sastry, Advocate attended and reiterated the submission already made. Discussion and Findings: We have examined the latest submissions made by the applicant in their appeal and the assertions made by the authorized representative as well at the time of Personal Hearing. The case law relied by the applicant relates to the pre-GST Period in relation to Export of Service under the Service Tax and is not applicable to the Intermediary service under the IGST Act, 2017. The applicant relied on the judgment of the CESTAT, South Zonal Branch, Bangalore in the case of IBM India Pvt Ltd. versus Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax reported in 2020 (34) G.S.T.L. 436 wherein the appellant is a subsidiary ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
