RCM not applicable on Consultancy service provided by Japan based Co.

RCM not applicable on Consultancy service provided by Japan-based Co. RCM not applicable on Consultancy service provided by Japan-based Co.

RCM not applicable on Consultancy service provided by Japan-based Co.
Consultancy service provided by Japan-based company, having a fixed establishment in India is not liable for RCM under ‘import of service’
The Hon’ble AAR Odisha, in the matter of Tokyo Electric Power Co. [Order No.02/Odisha-AARJ 2020-21 dated November 19, 2020] held that supply of consultancy service to an Indian entity Odisha Power Transmission Corporation Limited (“OPTCL”) is not import of service in terms of Section 2(11) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“IGST Act”) as the location of supplier as per Section 2(15) of the IGST Act is in India. Therefore, the Tokyo Electric Power Company, Holding Inc., being the supplier of service in India, is liable to pay tax and required to take GST registration.
Facts:-
M/s Tokyo Electric Power Company Service Limited (“TEPSCO”), a Japan based company, in association with Tokyo Electric Power Company, Holding Inc., (“Applicant”), a Japan based Company (collectively referred as “Consultants”) has entered into an agreement dated, April 13, 2018, with OPTCL, whereby consultants have agreed to provide consultancy services to M/s Odisha Transmission System Improvement Project (“Project”), Odisha, India.
The Applicant will provide and transfer the technical knowledge in relation to the outdoor Geographic Information System (“GIS”) equipment to OPTCL's engineers and staff through the actual consulting activities during the design stage and implementation stage of the project. The Applicant would carry out/provide consultancy services by the expert belonging/sub-station Engineer.
The Applicant was of view that he is neither liable to obtain registration as a regular taxpayer nor as a non-resident taxable person for the consultancy services provided to OPTCL. The Applicant also tried to establish that the supply is made-by the Foreign Company, who is located in Japan is not the supplier in the context of rendering consultancy service and would be liable to pay the tax under Reverse Charge Mechanism (“RCM”).
Issues:-
Whether the Applicant is required to be registered under Odisha Goods and Services Act, 2017 (“OGST Act”) and Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 (“CGST Act”) for the consultancy services provided to Odisha Power Transmission Corporation Limited?
Held:-
The Hon’ble AAR Odisha, in Order No.02/Odisha-AARJ2020-21 dated November 19, 2020 held as under:
- After analyzing the definition of 'location of the supplier of services', in terms of Section 2(15) of the IGST Act, the AAR noted that location of supplier is usually where a supply is made from, a place mentioned as a principal place of business on the GST registration certificate. But in the present case, the place of supply and the location of supplier is at the project site which is different from the place of business and it is a long-term contract spanning over 46 months, followed by 6 months of defects liability period.
- Observed that, the Applicant is responsible for providing and transferring the technical knowledge in relation to the outdoor GIS equipment to OPTCL Engineer and staffs through the actual consulting activities during the design stage and implementation stage of the project. In order to carry out the aforementioned tasks, it would depute the support staff and expert belonging at the project site. OPTCL shall provide them access to the project site in respect of which access is required for the performance of the services. The expert so deputed to the project site by the Applicant is to be paid at an agreed rate for the aforementioned tasks.
- Stated that, it is evident that the expert belonging maintains suitable structures in terms of human and technical resources at the sites of OPTCL. It ensures provision of supply of consulting services for the contract period, indicating sufficient degree of permanence to the human and technical resources employed at the sites. The Applicant through its expert belonging, therefore, supplies the service at the sites from fixed establishments as defined under Section 2(7) of the IGST Act. The location of the supplier should, therefore, be in India in terms of Section 2(15) of the IGST Act. Therefore, the Authority did not agree with the contention of the Applicant that the services supplied to OPTCL would be covered under the ambit of Entry No. 1 of Notification No. 10/2017- Integrated Tax (Rate) dated June 28, 2017 and shall be liable to tax under RCM.
- Held that, supply of consulting services through sub-station Engineer/ expert of the Applicant to OPTCL is therefore not the import of service within the meaning of Section 2(11) of the IGST Act. The Engineer/expert belonging to the Applicant should be treated as a supplier located in India, and made liable to pay GST, the place of supply being determined in terms of Section 12(2)(a) of the IGST Act. Since, the Applicant is liable for payment of GST, he is required to be registered under OGST Act and CGST Act for the consultancy services provided to OPTCL.
About Author

A2ZBimal Jain
Chartered Accountant
CA Bimal Jain is a Member of Institute of Chartered Accountants of India since May 1994 and Member of Institute of Company Secretaries of India since December 2006 along with a Bachelors degree in Law. Also, he is a Qualified SAP - FI/CO Consultant and has more than 21 years of experience in Indirect Taxation and specializes in all aspects of Service Tax, Value Added Tax (VAT)/ Central Sales Tax (CST), Central Excise, Customs, Foreign Trade Policy (FTP), Special Economic Zone (SEZ), Export Oriented Unit (EOU), Export-Import Laws and well acquainted with the concept and impact of way forward Goods and Services tax (GST).
A2Z Taxcorp LLP
Delhi, Delhi, India
468My Recent Articles
- Actions taken by the department during enquiry need not necessarily be termed as harassment
- Who are liable to generate e-invoice w.e.f October 1, 2022
- Personal penalty cannot be imposed on the Chairman of the Company for failure in ensuring proper accounting of the goods
- Stayed the order of cancellation of GST Registration of the assessee for continuing the trading activities
- Can CA be arrested- Section 69 vs Section 132 of the CGST Act
Up Next
Loading suggestions…









