TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 514
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s or service, respectively as being without any legal basis; b). To issue a Writ of Mandamus holding that the Petitioner is eligible to claim refund of Accumulated Input tax credit in terms of Section 16 of the IGST Act read with Section 54 of the CGST Act; c). To issue a Writ of Mandamus holding that the services provided by the Petitioner are in the nature of export of services; d) To issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent No. 1 to calculate Adjusted total turnover as per Rule 89 of the CGST Rules after giving due consideration to the credit notes issued;. CGST Rules after giving due consideration to the credit notes issued; e) To issue a Writ of Mandamus holding that various inputs and input services availed by the Petitioner is in the course or furtherance of business of the Petitioner and the Petitioner is eligible to avail ITC on the same as it is not restricted as per Section 17 of the CGST Act: f.) To issue a Writ of Mandamus holding that the Petitioner is eligible for ITC on provisioning of group charges; g) To issue a Writ of Mandamus holding that the Petitioner has availed duty drawback only with respect to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ST (iii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Lakshmi Machine Works - (2007) 290 ITD 667 (SC) (iv) BT (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Union of India - (2023) CENTAX 89 (DEL), (v) M Trade Links v. Union of India - (2024) 19 CENTAX 131 (Ker) 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents-Revenue would reiterate the various contentions urged in the statement of objections and submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. 5. I have given my anxious consideration to the rival submissions and perused the material on record. 6. The Petitioner is registered under Central Goods and Services Tax Act and is primarily engaged in the business of manufacturing and supply of wind turbine blades. The Petitioner entered into a Master Service Agreement with LM Group Holdings A/S, a company duly incorporated under the laws of Denmark (Contractor) and its Group subsidiaries. As per the said agreement, the Petitioner has to provide various services such as finite element analysis, core engineering, stress engineering, product equipment design, manufacturing technologies engineering, product development, quality testing services and resear....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he said error was recognised by the petitioner in the month of October 2019 and issued a credit note to reverse the transaction and also sought for eligible refund under the head 'export without payment of tax'. Subsequently, the petitioner filed an application of refund of accumulated ITC for the impugned periods as per the provisions of the IGST Act read CGST Act and rules made thereunder before the Respondent No. 2. The refund applications were rejected with the following major contentions: (i) Supplies made outside India does not qualify as export of services (ii) Incorrect computation of adjusted total turnover (iii) ITC disallowed on royalty expenses paid (iv) Non-submission of relevant documents (v) ITC ineligible on several supplies (vi) Reduction of refund amount on account of availment of benefit of duty drawback. 10. It is contended that the petitioner to substantiate various claims filed a reply with elaborate submissions for each of such contentions before the Respondent No. 2 along with required documents. However, the Order-in-Original partly allowed the refund claims for few periods and the details of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....; further, the manpower and handling charges incurred by the petitioner being incidental to the supply of services to its customers located outside India, has to be included in the value of taxable value of the exports as per Section 15 of the CGST Act. Insofar as cradle rental services are concerned, the said service is an independent service provided by the petitioner and is covered under paragraph 5 (f) of Schedule II of the CGST Act which treats transfer of right to use goods as deemed supply of service and the transaction in the present case qualifies to be export of services as per Section 2(6) of the IGST Act. 13. It is also relevant to state that the petitioner and LM Group Holding A/S are not merely establishments of distinct persons; as per the Master Service Agreement, the Contractor and the petitioner are independent parties, and the petitioner acts as Independent Contractor in providing the services under the said agreement and the petitioner and Contractor are different legal entities one situated in India and other situated outside India. In Linde Engineering's case supra, it was held that a subsidiary company in India providing services to its parent entity outsi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to foreign entities, billed in freely convertible foreign exchange (USD), and do not constitute a mere internal transaction between establishments of the same distinct person; for the R&D and core engineering services, the ultimate deliverable is specialized research reports sent electronically outside India for furtherance of the client's offshore business; the place of supply must be governed by the default rule under Section 13(2) of the IGST Act (Location of the Recipient), which is outside India. 17. The material on record also establishes that specialized repairs (such as wind blade access rope repair) and blade balancing services are entirely executed at the offshore locations of the clients in foreign countries (e.g., Spain, USA) and because the physical goods are not required to be made structurally available to the petitioner within India, the place of supply is outside India; so also, expenses incurred on vital business items such as manpower supply, material handling, production overheads, housekeeping, and standard uniform outlays are fundamentally utilized "in the course or furtherance of business" under Section 16(1) of the CGST Act and denying these inputs i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....edings and consequently, the impugned orders passed by the respondents refusing to refund ITC on royalty expenses in a sum of Rs. 3,65,39,905/- also deserve to be quashed. 21. A perusal of the material on record including the impugned orders will also indicate that the refund claim of the petitioner in a sum of Rs. 3,21,87,780/- has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner had availed ineligible ITC which is also contrary to law and facts inasmuch as the petitioner had used the said inputs and input services in the course/furtherance of business and had complied with all the conditions prescribed under Section 16(1) & (2) of CGST Act, particularly, when the said inputs and input services were not specifically blocked under Section 17(5) of the CGST Act; at any rate, eligibility of the petitioner to claim ITC cannot be determined in a refund proceedings as held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of BT (India)'s supra, and accordingly, the impugned orders insofar as they relate to rejecting the refund claim of the petitioners on the ground of ineligible ITC also deserve to be quashed. 22. Insofar as the impugned orders relating to refund rejection on account of ....