Lubrizol Advance Materials India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Bombay High Court)
Denial of ITC refund on export of services on the ground of ‘intermediary’ status set aside; matter remanded for fresh examination: Bombay HC
The petitioner is a leading supplier of lubricants. It is providing administrative and sales related support services to its group entity located outside India. It claimed that the services are exported in terms of section 2(6) of the IGST Act. It claimed refund of accumulated input tax credit under section 54 of the CGST Act read with Rule 89 of the Rules. Refund was rejected holding that the petitioner is an “intermediary” under section 13(8)(b) of the Act. Hence; petition was filed.
The Hon’ble Bombay High Court set aside the order and allowed the petition. It held: (i) in the petitioners own case; under the service tax regime; it has been held that the petitioner is not an “intermediary”; (ii) similar issue has been decided in Sundyne Pumps and Vistex Asia case; (iii) in that case the High Court examined the agreement and held that the Indian subsidiary was not an “agent”; (iv) accordingly; remands the matter back to the appellant original adjudicating authority to examine the issue again.
