TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (11) TMI 1036
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....enta Biosciences Private Limited, Santa Monica Works, Ilhas, Corlim, North Goa- 403110 ("the Appellant" / "M/s. Syngenta/M/s. SBPL", in short) having GSTIN 30AAACZ0348M1ZE filed an application under Section 97 of the Goa Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the SGST Act) and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the CGST Act) seeking an Advance Ruling in respect of the following questions:- (i) Whether the activity of technical testing services carried out by the appellant be treated as 'zero rated supply'. (ii) lf the answer to the aforesaid question is negative, then is the appellant liable to pay IGST on the said 'supply'. 2.2. After going through the provisions of the IGST Act, 2017, CGST Act, 2017 and SGST Act, 2017, the Goa Authority for Advance Ruling vide its Advance Ruling No. GOA/GAAR/09 of 2018-19/1456 dated 29/08/2019 gave the Advance Ruling as under:- (i) The service provided by the appellant does not fall within the definition of export of service as defined under Section 2(6) of the IGST Act, 2017. (ii) The applicant is liable to pay CGST and SGST on the aforesaid su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s fixed on 20/12/2019. But the appellant failed to avail the opportunity on the said date. Again, the personal hearing was fixed on 17.01.2020. The authorized representatives of the appellant attended the hearing on behalf of the appellant and submitted their written contentions and sought relief as stated therein. Discussion and Findings: 11. We have carefully gone through the material on record including the facts involved, relevant statutory provisions and the appellant's grounds/submissions including case laws cited by them. 12. The short issues for determination in this appeal are:- (i) Whether the activity of technical testing services carried out by the appellant be treated as 'zero rated supply' of services in accordance with the provisions of Section 16 of the IGST Act, 2017, as claimed by the appellant or whether the same does not amount to 'zero rated supply' / 'export of services', as held by the lower Authority ? (ii) Whether the appellant is liable to pay IGST on the said 'supply of services' as claimed by them or they are liable to pay the applicable CGST + SGST as ruled by the lower Authority ? 13.1. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a. (2) The place of supply of services except the services specified in sub-sections (3) to (13) shall be the location of the recipient of services : Provided that where the location of the recipient of services is not available in the ordinary course of business, the place of supply shall be the location of the supplier of services. (3) The place of supply of the following services shall be the location where the services are actually performed, namely (a) services supplied in respect of goods which are required to be made physically available by the recipient of services to the supplier of services, or to a person acting on behalf of the supplier of services in order to provide the services : Provided that when such services are provided from a remote location by way of electronic means, the place of supply shall be the location where goods are situated at the time of supply of services: [Provided further that nothing contained in this clause shall apply in the case of services supplied in respect of goods which are temporarily imported into India for repairs or for any other treatment or process and are exported after such re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nsactions, in any manner. They have not disputed that the 'services in respect of the goods provided by the recipient' are actually performed in India i.e., Goa. The outcome of the services being reports which are sent to the recipient abroad or that the service recipient is concerned only with the test-report, can have no bearing or relevance, once the statutory provision is clearly, plainly and unambiguously worded, as above and it is impermissible to expand the laid down criterion or to interpolate and insert words/phrases which are not used in such provisions. 14.1. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Cus. (Import), Mumbai Versus Dilip Kumar & Company [2018 (361) E.L.T. 577 (S.C.)] held that Interpretation of statutes - Statute must be construed according to the intention of Legislature .... Interpretation of statutes - Words in a statute when clear, plain and unambiguous and only one meaning can be inferred, Courts bound to give effect to the said meaning irrespective of consequences. 14.2. The Hon'ble Supreme Court (Larger Bench) in the case of Union of India V/s M/s Dharmendra Textile Processors cited at 2008 (231) E.L.T. 3....