2019 (3) TMI 656 - AAR - GST

Maintenance contracts: AAR rules principal supply is services, not goods.

In Re: Cummins India Limited

The Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) determined that in maintenance contracts between the Applicant and the customer, the principal supply is the ... Liability of GST - principal supply of the composite supply qua maintenance contracts executed between the customer and the Applicant - Held that:- The main purpose behind executing the contract is to keep the engines unimpaired and operative at all times for which a fixed price has been decided for the AMC. In order to provide immediate services to the customer and to keep the minimum downtime of the engines, the Applicant has engaged dealers who inter-alia provide maintenance services to the customers on behalf of the Applicant - The goods, material, spare parts, etc. are required to be supplied only when necessary i.e. when, during the course of maintenance services it is found by the skilled personnel that there is a need for such parts which will effectively keep the runtime of the DG Sets at maximum acceptable time. A composite supply means that there is a supply of two or more goods or services together and such goods or services are provided together in the normal course of business - In the present case, a perusal of the agreements reveal that there is definitely is a supply of two or more goods or services together and such goods or services are provided together in the normal course of business and therefore there is no doubt that there is a composite supply by the Applicant in this case As both the conditions as prescribed under Section 2(30) of CGST Act have been fulfilled, the underlying transaction constitute as a 'composite supply'. In the subject case it is seen that even though the AMC covers both, supply of goods and service, the predominant intention is to provide maintenance services for the proper upkeep of the machines belonging to their clients and, supply of goods follows as a consequent to the supply of maintenance service. Hence supply of maintenance service is the dominant intention of the contracts and can be considered as the 'principal supply' - the principal supply in the transaction before us is supply of service, then the place of supply is required to be determine. The place of supply would be determined in terms of the default Section 12(2) of the IGST Act which states that the location of the recipient would be the place of supply. Since the supply of maintenance service in the present case is for a single price with supply of spare parts/goods as and when required, the supply of both, goods and services are made in conjunction with each other in the ordinary course of business and therefore considering the provisions of the GST Laws, the supply of services/goods in the present case is naturally bundled, with the supply of goods being incidental to the supply of services and therefore such contract are to be considered as a composite supply of service where the principal supply is service and the supply of goods is incidental to such supply of service. Thus, the principal supply in the present case between the applicant and the customer is one of supply of services. Issues Involved:1. Determination of GST liability by deciding the principal supply of the composite supply in maintenance contracts executed between the customer and the Applicant.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Determination of GST liability by deciding the principal supply of the composite supply in maintenance contracts executed between the customer and the Applicant:The Applicant, Cummins India Limited, sought an advance ruling to determine the GST liability by identifying the principal supply in the composite supply under their Annual Maintenance Contracts (AMC). The Applicant is engaged in manufacturing diesel and natural gas engines and providing after-sales services, including maintenance services, supply of spare parts, and other related services.Applicant's Contentions:The Applicant argued that the AMCs involved a composite supply, comprising both services and goods, where the principal supply should be identified to determine the applicable tax structure. They referred to the definitions under the CGST Act, specifically Sections 2(30) and 2(90), which define 'composite supply' and 'principal supply,' respectively. The Applicant contended that the dominant intention of the AMC is to provide maintenance services, with the supply of parts being ancillary. They supported their argument with past judicial precedents, emphasizing that the primary object of the contract is the provision of services, not the transfer of property in goods.Concerned Officer's Contentions:The concerned officer examined the Applicant's submissions and the AMC agreements, noting that the predominant element of the AMC is the supply of services. The officer highlighted that the primary obligation of the Applicant is to ensure the equipment's uptime, provide preventive maintenance, and carry out necessary repairs, with the supply of consumables and small parts being incidental.Observations and Findings:The Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) reviewed the facts and submissions, noting that the AMC agreements involve rendering maintenance services along with the supply of necessary parts. The AAR referred to the definition of 'composite supply' under Section 2(30) of the CGST Act, confirming that the AMC constitutes a composite supply. They further analyzed the definition of 'principal supply' under Section 2(90) and concluded that the predominant intention of the AMC is to provide maintenance services, with the supply of parts being incidental.The AAR determined that the principal supply in the AMC is the supply of services. Consequently, the place of supply would be the location of the recipient, as per Section 12(2) of the IGST Act. The location of the supplier would be Maharashtra, where the Applicant is registered.Conclusion:The AAR concluded that the principal supply in the maintenance contracts between the Applicant and the customer is the supply of services. The supply of goods is incidental to the supply of services, making the entire transaction a composite supply of services. The GST liability should be determined accordingly, with the place of supply being the location of the recipient and the supplier's location being Maharashtra.Order:The principal supply in the present case between the Applicant and the customer is one of the supply of services.