Consultancy payments to foreign entity liable for IGST under reverse charge mechanism Section 13

The AAAR Maharashtra ruled that payments made by the appellant to IVL Sweden for consultancy support services are liable for IGST under reverse charge mechanism. The authority determined that IVL India was the primary consultant providing services to MCGM, with IVL Sweden acting as guarantor and support provider. Since the service recipient was located in India and supplier abroad, the place of supply was India under Section 13 of IGST Act 2017. The support services constituted import of services, making them taxable under Entry 1 of Notification 10/2017-I.T. (Rate). The appeal was rejected.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Determination of service provider in the context of the transactions under question.
2. Applicability of Integrated Goods and Service Tax (IGST) under reverse charge mechanism.
3. Examination of place of supply for the services in question.
4. Evaluation of the import of services criteria.
5. Applicability of case laws cited by the appellant.

Summary:

Issue 1: Determination of Service Provider
The Appellate Authority examined the contract and concluded that IVL India is the service provider to MCGM, raising invoices and receiving payments for the Project Management Consultancy (PMC) services. IVL Sweden acts as a guarantor, providing expertise and resources essential for the project. The Authority found that IVL India avails support services from IVL Sweden to execute the PMC work, based on the credentials and experience of IVL Sweden.

Issue 2: Applicability of IGST under Reverse Charge Mechanism
The Authority upheld the ruling that the transfer of monetary proceeds by IVL India to IVL Sweden is liable for IGST under the reverse charge mechanism as per Entry No. 1 of Notification 10/2017 - IGST (Rate) dated June 28, 2017. The services provided by IVL Sweden to IVL India qualify as import of services, making IVL India liable for IGST.

Issue 3: Examination of Place of Supply
The place of supply for the services received by IVL India from IVL Sweden was determined to be India, as per Section 13(2) of the IGST Act, 2017. This section states that the place of supply of services shall be the location of the recipient, which in this case is IVL India located in India.

Issue 4: Evaluation of Import of Services Criteria
The services provided by IVL Sweden to IVL India met all criteria for import of services under Section 2(11) of the IGST Act, 2017:
- The supplier of service (IVL Sweden) is located outside India.
- The recipient of service (IVL India) is located in India.
- The place of supply of service is in India.

Issue 5: Applicability of Case Laws
The Authority reviewed the case laws cited by the appellant, including B.G. Exploration & Production India Ltd. vs. Commissioner of CGST & CEX., Navi Mumbai, and others. It concluded that the facts of these cases were distinguishable from the current case, and thus, the case laws were not applicable.

Order:
The Appellate Authority upheld the MAAR Order No. GST-ARA-50/2020-21/B-108 dated 01.12.2022, confirming that the transfer of monetary proceeds by IVL India to IVL Sweden is liable for IGST under the reverse charge mechanism. The appeal filed by the appellant was rejected.

---