IT software related consulting services in the area of Oracle ERP w.r.t Oracle Financials considered as supply u/s 7 and GST is applicable on it
Classification of supply- The appellant has stated that he is engaged in the business of providing IT software related consulting services in the area of Oracle ERP w.r.t Oracle Financials.
The appellant had requested to set aside the ruling of the Original Authority and reconsider as to whether the services provided by- the appellant is a supply of services
t is not disputed that the appellant is under contractual obligation to Doyen Systems to provide services through ‘Doyen Systems’ for which Payment is agreed to be made by Doyen Systems to the appellant after verifying the invoice and the client time-sheet as in the Contract Agreement. Further as observed by the lower Authority the payment of ‘Consideration’ to the appellant is entirely with the Doyen Systems and the appellant cannot claim consideration directly with the client of Doyen Systems or the client of Doyen Systems is not the person liable to pay the appellant for the services supplied by the appellant. Thus, it is clearly evident that the recipient of Services of the appellant is Doyen Systems. We find that the lower authority has considered the above and accordingly pronounced the ruling. We do not find any reason to interfere with the same.
we do not find any reason to interfere with the Order of the Advance Ruling Authority in this matter. The subject appeal is disposed of accordingly.
IT software related consulting services in the area of Oracle ERP w.r.t Oracle Financials considered as supply u/s 7 and GST is applicable on it
Classification of supply- The appellant has stated that he is engaged in the business of providing IT software related consulting services in the area of Oracle ERP w.r.t Oracle Financials.
The appellant had requested to set aside the ruling of the Original Authority and reconsider as to whether the services provided by- the appellant is a supply of services
t is not disputed that the appellant is under contractual obligation to Doyen Systems to provide services through ‘Doyen Systems’ for which Payment is agreed to be made by Doyen Systems to the appellant after verifying the invoice and the client time-sheet as in the Contract Agreement. Further as observed by the lower Authority the payment of ‘Consideration’ to the appellant is entirely with the Doyen Systems and the appellant cannot claim consideration directly with the client of Doyen Systems or the client of Doyen Systems is not the person liable to pay the appellant for the services supplied by the appellant. Thus, it is clearly evident that the recipient of Services of the appellant is Doyen Systems. We find that the lower authority has considered the above and accordingly pronounced the ruling. We do not find any reason to interfere with the same.
we do not find any reason to interfere with the Order of the Advance Ruling Authority in this matter. The subject appeal is disposed of accordingly.