Case Law Details
In re Mcdonald Pelz Global Commodities India Pvt. Ltd. (GST AAR Haryana)
Mr. A appoints Mr. B to procure certain goods from the market. Mr. B identifies various suppliers who can provide the goods as desired by Mr. A, and asks the supplier (Mr. C) to send the goods and issue the invoice directly to Mr. A. In this scenario, Mr. B is only acting as the procurement agent, and has in no way involved himself in the supply or receipt of the goods. Hence, in accordance with the provisions of this Act, Mr. B is not an agent of Mr. A for supply of goods in terms of Schedule I.
The applicant has submitted that it is neither acting as an agent for the supplier nor for the buyer (recipient). The tax invoices are issued by the supplier in the name of the recipient. The applicant merely acts as a facilitator between the buyer and the recipient and charges its brokerage/ commission. It has nothing to do with the goods supplied or received. The nature of services provided by the applicant is identical to scenario 1 discussed above and as such the applicant is not a commission agent in view of the conjoint reading of Section 2(5) of the CGST Act, 2017 and the CBIC Circular No. 57/31/2018-GST dated 04th September, 2018. It is an intermediary as defined in Section 2(13) of the IGST Act, 2017. It is worth mentioning here that the term intermediary has not been defined under the CGST Act, but in view of the provisions of Section 2(120) of the CGST Act, 2017, it has the same meaning as defined in the IGST Act, 2017.
Since, the applicant is not a commission agent, the services rendered by it are not covered under point (g) of the description of services mentioned at Serial No. 54 of exemption Notification 12/2017 CT (Rate) dated 28.06.2017.
The services of the applicant (supplier) are not exempt under the purview of exemption Notification No. 12/2017 CT (Rate) dated 28.06.2017.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
