Hon’ble Authority, New Delhi
The transaction in question qualified as a transfer of right to use goods and, consequently, be outside definition of ‘service’ under Section 65B(44) of the Finance Act and no Service tax could be levied on such transaction.
Advance Rulings (CE, C & ST), New Delhi in the case of SICPA India (P.) Ltd. [(2016) 67 taxmann.com 142 (AAR - New Delhi)]
We are sharing with you an important judgment of the Hon’ble Authority for Advance Rulings (CE, C & ST), New Delhi in the case of SICPA India (P.) Ltd. [(2016) 67 taxmann.com 142 (AAR - New Delhi)], on following issue:
Whether granting of non-exclusive/ non-transferable right to use the system qualifies as transfer of right to use goods (consequently be outside the definition of service) when complete set of various machines/equipments were required to be installed & commissioned at site of customer and overall operation & maintenance processes shall be responsibility of customer?
Facts & Background:
On introduction of Excise Supply Chain information Management System (“ESCIMS”) by the Excise Department, Government of NCT of Delhi, to automate and regulate liquor sales in Delhi, SICPA India (P.) Ltd. (“Applicant”) entered into system delivery agreement with a customer to provide for a system comprising of a complete set of various machines/equipments, which were required to be installed and commissioned at site of customer as per ESCIMS. In terms of the Agreement:
With regard to consideration for the agreed scope of work, the Applicant was required to get a consolidated sum based on per thousand labels printed using the system. The Applicant made an application before the Hon’ble Advance Ruling Authority (“AAR”) for determining applicability of Service tax on stated transaction.
Applicant’s contention: It was stated that activity undertaken by the Applicant was a transfer of right to use goods and same was excluded from definition of a ‘service’ given under Section 65B(44) of the Finance Act, 1994 (“the Finance Act”).
Revenue’s contention: It was argued by the Revenue that one of the attributes of transfer of the right to use the goods is that for the period during which the transferee has such legal rights, it has to be the exclusion to the transferor. Thus, the instant transaction will not come under the category of 'transfer of the right to use the goods', unless such right is exclusive and in the instant case, right to use goods by the customer is non-exclusive.
The Hon’ble AAR, after detailed discussion, held that:
Thus, the transaction in question qualified as a transfer of right to use goods and, consequently, be outside definition of ‘service’ under Section 65B(44) of the Finance Act and no Service tax could be levied on such transaction.
Hope the information will assist you in your Professional endeavours. In case of any query/ information, please do not hesitate to write back to us.
Thanks & Best Regards,
FCA, FCS, LLB, B.Com (Hons)
Disclaimer: The contents of this document are solely for informational purpose. It does not constitute professional advice or recommendation of firm. Neither the authors nor firm and its affiliates accepts any liabilities for any loss or damage of any kind arising out of any information in this document nor for any actions taken in reliance thereon.
Readers are advised to consult the professional for understanding applicability of this judgement in the respective scenarios. While due care has been taken in preparing this document, the existence of mistakes and omissions herein is not ruled out. No part of this document should be distributed or copied (except for personal, non-commercial use) without our written permission.
Live Class on Discover the Dynamics of Reverse Charge Mechanism in GST
Excel Interactive Dashboards and Data Analysis Certification Course