2019 (2) TMI 1005 – APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, HARYANA – TMI – Place of supply – sourcing (on a worldwide basis)) of goods from India – export or not – Challenge to Advance ruling decision – Non-speaking order – It is pleaded that the Ld. AAR has not applied mind while passing the impugned order and the order is non-speaking.
–
Held that:- It is observed that the appellant is side tracking the facts by submitting that the appellant is not an agent or broker, as no such question was asked before the AAR – The Id. AAR has answered all the Questions raised, in term of relevant provisions of the GST Act and by giving detailed reasons. The plea of the appellant, that the AAR has given SAC & description alongwith tax rate which was not asked for, does not hold water because AAR has clarified each and every aspect raised in the application for Advance Ruling by giving self-explanatory findings. Thus the arguments raised by the appellant are untenable.
–
The appellant has
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
grawal, 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 present appeal has been filed under Section 100 (1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/the Haryana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [hereinafter referred to as the CGST Act and HGST Act respectively ] by M/s. Esprit India Private Limited [hereinafter referred to as the Appellant ] against the Advance Ruling No. HAR/HAAR/R/2018-19/6, dated 11.04.2018. = 2018 (7) TMI 1334 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS HARYANA A copy of order dated 11.04.2018 of the Advance Ruling Authority was received by the appellant on 12.07.2018 and the appeal has been filed on 13.08.2018 which is in time. (11-12.08.18 being holidays) BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE 1. The appellant namely M/s. Esprit India Pvt. Ltd. is a subs
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
n to goods and merchandise including wearing apparel, shoes & accessories and fabric. A brief description of the functions/responsibilities of EDCFE and Esprit Germany and Esprit India Pvt. Ltd. is listed below: Sr.No. Functions/Activities Role of EDCFE/Esprit Germany Role of Esprit India 1. Market research No role Esprit India conducts market research to understand market dynamics, gather pricing information from different suppliers and advise on the best available combination of price, quality and delivery of the goods 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 principle
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
transportation. Esprit India based on the guidelines received from EDCFE conducts quality checks at various stages of production. It also checks whether the goods meet the specification, quality, delivery time, and other requirement of Esprit Germany. 6. Logistics Products are dispatched by the suppliers to Esprit Germany. Esprit India makes logistics arrangement for the goods in accordance with the instructions of Esprit Germany received through EDCFE and assure that all documents related to shipment of the goods Esprit Germany are proper. 7. Contract conclusion No role Esprit India does not participate in activities which bring supplier and Esprit Germany into binding contract of purchase of goods. 8. Involving and payment Suppliers directly invoice to Esprit Macao and it makes payment directly to the suppliers No role in the invoicing and payment process as all invoices are sent directly by suppliers to Esprit Germany without any involvement of Esprit India. After notice and opportu
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
nt 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. Sh. Nitin Agrawal, Power of Attorney, is present today on behalf of the appellant M/S Esprit India Private Limited. He has reiterated the grounds taken in the memorandum of appeal. It is pleaded that the Ld. AAR has not applied mind while passing the impugned orde
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
New Delhi v. Menon Associates (2015 77 VST 168 Del.) = 2014 (11) TMI 970 – DELHI HIGH COURT 3. Commissioner of Service Tax, New Delhi v. Menon Associates (2015 77 VST 168 Del.) = 2014 (11) TMI 970 – DELHI HIGH COURT 4. Sunrise Intermediary services-case law. 5. ARA ruling Global Reach Education [2018-VIL-06-AAR] WB 2017-18-02 (West Bengal) = 2018 (4) TMI 808 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, WEST BENGAL 6. AAR ruling Gogte Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. (2018-VIL-30-AAR-02) Karnataka. = 2018 (5) TMI 759 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING – KARNATAKA 7. Evalueserve.com Pvt. Ltd. V.CST, Gurgaon 2018 ACR 390 CESTAT Chandigarh. = 2018 (3) TMI 1430 – CESTAT CHANDIGARH With these arguments he pleaded that the impugned order of Ld. AAR may be set aside. Of the Department : The representatives of CGST/HGST Authorities have defended the impugned order, stating that the Authority for Advance Ruling has passed a detailed and self-speaking order answering all the questions raised by the app
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
rovert 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 refereed to, which read as under:- 103. (1) The advance ruling pronounced by the Authority or the Appellate Authority under this Chapter shall be binding only- (a) on the applicant who had sought it in respect of any matter referred to in sub-section (2) of section 97 for advance ruling. (b) on the concerned officer or the jurisdictional officer in respect of the applicant. (2) The advance ruling referred to in sub-section (1) shall be binding unless the law, facts or circumstances supporting the original advance ruling have changed. It is argued that the Question No. 1 raised by the applicant/appellant has rightly been answered by the AAR and Questions No. 2 and 3 (of the applicant/appellant) have also been rightly refused because they do not fall within the ambit of Section 97(2) of the CG
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
giving detailed reasons. The plea of the appellant, that the AAR has given SAC & description alongwith tax rate which was not asked for, does not hold water because AAR has clarified each and every aspect raised in the application for Advance Ruling by giving self-explanatory findings. Thus the arguments raised by the appellant are untenable. The case laws cited by the appellant are distinguishable as the facts and circumstances of the present case are different. The appellant has himself admitted that he has been providing services to the Esprit Germany in terms of the contract between Esprit 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
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =