In Re: M\/s. K Uttamlal Exports Pvt Ltd.
GST
2019 (2) TMI 742 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA – 2019 (21) G. S. T. L. 577 (A. A. R. – GST)
AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA – AAR
Dated:- 23-10-2018
GST-ARA-57\/2018-19\/B-130
GST
SHRI B.V. BORHADE, AND SHRI PANKAJ KUMAR, (MEMBER)
\nPROCEEDINGS
\n(Under section 98 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017)
\nThe present application has been filed under section 97 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [hereinafter referred to as “the CGST Act and MGST Act”] by K Uttamlal Exports Pvt. Ltd., the applicant, seeking an advance ruling in respect of the following questions.
\n1) Whether the goods exported out of India directly by the manufacturer mentioning the applicant as Third Party Exporter for the purpose of Foreign Trade Policy will be considered as exports at the hands of the Applican<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n . Ampak Company Inc. (referred to as “Ampak”) in USA. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n tes that on export of the goods, they raise the invoice on Ampak vide invoice no. 16033-A. Copy of the invoice no 16033-A is marked and annexed herewith as Annexure 8. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n ant. The goods are indeed exported out of India to USA which is outside India. Thus, the above transaction shall qualify as export supply under the GST law. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n its name. Accordingly, the Customs Authorities have been issuing the shipping bill in the name of the manufacturer exporters. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n al Authority, the Appellant is filing the present submissions: = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n om the premises of the manufacturer to client. The export invoice, shipping bill, bill of lading all mention the manufacturer as exporter and M\/s. K Uttamlal Exports Pvt Ltd as the third party exporter. On export of goods, M\/s. K Uttamlal Exports Pvt Ltd raises the invoice to client and foreign currency is realised. The Bank Realisation Certificate (BRC) is issued in the name of M\/s. K Uttarnlal Exports Pvt ltd. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n ods exported out of India directly by the manufacturer mentioning the applicant as Third Party exporter for the purpose of Foreign Trade Policy will be considered as exports at the hands of the Applicant under the GST laws. Yes, however, manufacturer exporter can also claim it as exports. The export invoice, shipping bill and bill of lading all are in the name of manufacturer exporter. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n s office by the applicant. On being admitted the applicant made arguments and submissions as under:- = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n eemed to have been paid = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" In Re: M\/s. K Uttamlal Exports Pvt Ltd.GST2019 (2) TMI 742 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA – 2019 (21) G. S. T. L. 577 (A. A. R. – GST)AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA – AARDated:- 23-10-2018GST-ARA-57\/2018-19\/B-130 GSTSHRI B.V. BORHADE, AND SHRI PANKAJ KUMAR, (MEMBER) PROCEEDINGS (Under section 98 of the Central Goods and Services … Continue reading “In Re: M\/s. K Uttamlal Exports Pvt Ltd.”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-16723","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16723","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=16723"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16723\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=16723"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=16723"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=16723"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n1.2. The Applicant submits that, it does not own any manufacturing facility in India. The Applicant procures the chemicals from the manufacturers for export to Ampak.
\n1.3. The relevant fact of the present Advance Ruling Application is narrated in brief as under:
\n1.4. The Applicant received an order for export of Linear Alkyl Benzene Sulphonic Acid 96%, on 8\/8\/2017 vide Purchase Order Number: P17013051 from Ampak. Copy of P.O Dated 8\/8\/2017 is marked and annexed herewith as Annexure 3.
\n1.5. On receipt of the above confirmed purchase order from Ampak, Applicant placed back to back purchase order on M\/S Sai Fertilizers & Phospates Pvt Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Sai Fertilizers”) for Linear Alkayl Benzene Sulphonic Acid 96% on 09\/08\/2017 vide P.O. Number # KUEM\/SFPPL\/090817. copy of P.O. Number #KUEM\/SFPPL\/090817 is marked & attached herewith as Annexure 4.
\n1.6. On receipt of above confirmed P.O Number #KUEM\/SFPPL\/090817 dt <\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n1.10. Applicant submits that, they have realized foreign currency for the above exports on 09.03.2018. The Bank Realization Certificate (BRC) is issued in the name of the Applicant on 14.03.2018. The copy of the Bank Realization Certificate is marked and annexed herewith as Annexure 9.
\n1.11. As far as GST is concerned, the Applicant has claimed the above supplies as exports while filing the GST Returns. The Applicant has Letter of Undertaking (LUT) valid for the period of the export concerned in the above transaction.
\n1.12. The applicant submits that, Sai Fertilizers has also claimed the above supply of goods as exports under GST on payment of the IGST. The copy of the GST invoice of Sai Fertilizers is marked and annexed herewith as Annexure 10.
\nStatement containing the applicant's interpretation of law and or facts <\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n2.6. Secondly, the said exports supply will be at the hands of the Applicant only and not at the hands of the manufacturer Sai Fertilizers.
\n2.7. Applicant submits that it is the Applicant who has got the export order, the BRC and other documents in its name. The supply is made by the Applicant to Ampak USA. The manufacturer has made supply to the Applicant and not to Ampak USA though the Shipping Bill is prepared by the manufacturer Sai Fertilizer. Further in all the documents of the customs also, the applicant is named as the Third Party Exporter.
\n2.8. The Applicant submits that the payment has been received by the applicant in foreign currency which is evident from the BRC annexed along with the present application.
\n2.9. Thus, the Applicant is the exporter for the all purposes of the GST laws and not the manufacturer Sai Fert<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n3.3. However, all other documents such as export order, BRC, invoice is in the name of the third party exporter.
\n3.4. In the present case Sai Fertilizers is the manufacturer exporter under FTP and the Applicant is the third party exporter.
\n3.5. All the BRC and other documents are in the name of the Applicant except for the Shipping Bill. However, in the shipping bill also the name of the applicant appears as the third party exporter.
\n3.6. Thus, though under the FTP manufacturer is considered as the exporter as per Para 2.42, for the GST law only the applicant can be considered as the exporter.
\n3.7. The applicant submits that what may be considered as export under the FTP does not have a binding effect on the GST law. Under GST law, the export supply has been defined and accordingly the exported has to be construed.
\n3.8. Thus, even though the Shipping Bill <\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n4. The Applicant submits that the Applicant is a 100% exporter and has claimed refund of the unutilized balance of ITC. The Applicant has not claimed refund of ITC only on those transactions where the Applicant has purchased the goods on payment of GST and exported the same in its own name.
\n5. The Applicant submits that the Applicant has not claimed refund on ITC on third party exports transactions. In other words, the Applicant has not claimed any refund on the exports where the Applicant is appearing as Third Party Exporter in the Shipping Bill.
\n6. The Applicant submits that in the above referred letter dated 04.09.2018 of the Jurisdictional Authority, the Jurisdictional Authority has accepted that even for the Third Party Exports transactions the Applicant must be considered as Exporter as far as GST laws is concerned.
\n7. The Applicant further submits that Ld. Jurisdictional Authority has further stated that supplies<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\nAnnexure 2 Para 2 (2.1 to 2.9)- The applicant, M\/s. K Uttamlal Exports Pvt Ltd, has claimed to have exported the goods outside India. Section 2(5) of the IGST Act, 2017, defines export of goods as under “Export of goods” with its grammatical variations and cognate expressions means taking goods out of India to a place outside India.
\nThere is no dispute regarding export of goods. The applicant is the third party exporter. The goods have been exported by the manufacturer directly from their premises to client. The export invoice, shipping bill, bill of lading also mention the m<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\nQuestion 2- If the said transaction, is held to be exports at the hands of the applicant under GST then whether it will qualify zero rated supply? Yes, it will be counted as zero rated supply on part of Third party exporter. In addition, third party exporter cannot claim it as exempted supply, as done by applicant in their monthly return.
\n04. HEARING
\nThe case was taken up for Preliminary hearing on dated 08.08.2018, when Sh. Rahul Thakkar, Advocate along with Sh. Janak Shah, Director and Sh. Amol Patil appeared and made written and oral submissions for admission of application as per contentions in<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n“The applicant, on receipt of the above confirmed purchase order from Ampak, has placed back to back purchase orders on M\/s. Sai Fertilizers and Phospates Pvt Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Sai Fertilizers”) for the said goods further to which Sai Fertilizers manufactured the said goods and exported the same directly from its premises under the Commercial Invoice and after filing Shipping Bill (where the Applicant is mentioned as the Third Party Exporter).The Bill of Lading prepared by the Shipping Line for the said exports also mentions the applicant as the third party exporter. Pursuant to export of the goods, the applicant raises invoice on Ampak. In respect of the said exported goods, the Applicant has received remuneration in foreign currency and the Bank Realization Certificate (BRC) is issued in their name. The Applicant has submitted that they have a Letter of Undertaking (L<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n(e) Determination of the liability to pay tax on any goods or services or both
\n(f) Whether the applicant is required to be registered
\n(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
\nIn the present case on the basis of the arguments made by them and scrutiny of records submitted by the applicant and the arguments put forth by them, we find that their main question is whether the transaction effected in the present case can be considered as exports made by them or the manufacturer exporter Sai Fertilizers. On proper and detailed examination of full facts as put by the applicant at the time of the final hearing, we find that this question is not covered under the purview of Section 97 of the CGST Act, 2017.
\nHence we hold the subject application is not maintainable and cannot be entertained and there<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n