TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (1) TMI 1344
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the facts of the case are that the appellants are wholly owned subsidiary of TORM, Denmark. They are engaged in providing Ship Management Services and Business Support Services to Torm Crewing Services Ltd. situated in Bermuda, one of their group companies. The appellant had availed CENVAT Credit on various input services which are used in providing the aforesaid export services and accordingly, they claimed cash refund of the accumulated CENVAT Credit during the period October, 2015 to December, 2015, April, 2016 to September, 2016 and October, 2016 to December, 2016 for Rs. 18,35,665/-, Rs. 26,12,211/- and Rs. 12,57,148/- respectively under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Notification No. 27/2012 dated 18.6.2012. Allegin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd signing off the ship g. Assist in vetting service as and when required and other incidental or ancillary activities in relation to ship management service. h. Providing navigational support to vessels in Indian territorial waters i. Ensuring compliance of vessel with requirements of the law of Flag State j. arranging and supervising dry dockings, repairs, alterations and maintenance of the Vessel to the standards agreed with Torm Bermuda and ensuring that the Vessel complies with all requirements and recommendations of the classification society, and with the law of the Flag State 4. From time to time on rendering the aforesaid services, they raised invoices on Torm Bermuda on the basis of Cost of S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t Service to Torm Bermuda on their own account and services were provided on principal to principal basis, therefore, they cannot be designated as an 'intermediary'. He submits that all the supply invoices are raised in the appellant's name and the appellant pays each vendors/service provider through own Bank account. Since the appellants are engaged in providing the Ship Management Services on their own behalf rather than arranging or facilitating the said services, therefore, their role is not as an agent or facilitator but a provider of service. It is their contention that if the services are provided by a service provider on his own account, he cannot be considered as an intermediary. He referred to the judgment in the case of Firstrand....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....agreement dated 1.4.2013 between the appellant (described as 'Ship Manager')and the overseas associate company Torm Bermuda (called as 'Primary Manager'), various services were agreed to be provided by the appellant to their overseas associate company. The services mentioned in the said agreement are broadly relate to Technical and Operation Services, Agency Services, SQE Services, Vetting Services, Crew Management Services etc.. The scope of each said services are narrated under various clauses of the agreement which as whole described as Ship Management service. Interpreting one of the said services particularly 'Agency Services', the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has concluded that the relation between the appellant service provider and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es; (i) Appointment of agents; (ii) Recording the expenses incurred (disbursement account) by the agents appointed for the particular vessel; (iii) Making the payment of disbursement accounts of agents; and (iv) Providing such other services as may be necessary to the effective operation of the Vessel." 10. From scope of the said agency services rendered by the appellant to their overseas associate company, it is clear that they were required to appoint agent, the recording of expenses incurred by the agents appointed for a particular vessel, making payment to disbursement account of the agent and providing such services as may be necessary to the effective operation of the vessels cannot make them ips....