Page 71 - GSTL_26th March 2020_Vol 34_Part 4
P. 71

2020 ]  ABBOTT HEALTHCARE P. LTD. v. COMMR. OF COMMERCIAL TAX, THRISSUR  581
               Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office in Mumbai. It is engaged inter
               alia in the sale of pharmaceutical products, diagnostic kits etc. and it is registered
               under the Goods and Services Tax Act in the State of Kerala. It is the case of the
               petitioner in the writ petition that as per the business model operated by it in the
               State of Kerala, it places its diagnostic instruments at the premises of unrelated
               hospitals, laboratories etc. for their use for a specified period without any con-
               sideration. The petitioner also enters into Reagent Supply and Instrument Use
               Agreements with various hospitals, laboratories etc., whereunder, the arrange-
               ment between the parties is for the supply of medical instruments to the hospi-
               tal/laboratory concerned, for their use, without any consideration for a specified
               period and for the supply of specified quantities of reagents, calibrators, dispos-
               ables etc.  at the prices specified  in the agreement,  through its  distributors on
               payment of applicable GST. It is stated that, as per the agreement, while the sup-
               ply of  instruments is by the petitioner, the supply  of reagents, calibrators and
               disposables are effected by its distributor, who purchases the said products from
               the petitioner on principal to principal basis. When the distributor supplies the
               reagents, calibrators and disposables to the hospitals/laboratories concerned, the
               distributor discharges the applicable GST on the price charged for supply of the
               said products. In other words, there is no direct sale/supply of the reagents, cali-
               brators and disposables by the petitioner to the hospitals/laboratories in ques-
               tion. It is also stated that the value of instruments placed at the premises of the
               hospitals/laboratories compared to the total turnover of supply of reagents, cali-
               brators and disposables by the distributor over the contract period, is small and
               would only be around 20% of the turnover of supply of reagents, calibrators etc.
               The agreement entered  into between the  parties  also contains a clause which
               provides that if the hospital  fails to purchase specified minimum quantum of
               reagents, calibrators etc., then the petitioner is entitled to recover from the hospi-
               tal an amount equal to the deficit in the actual purchases, vis-a-vis, the minimum
               purchase stipulated under the contract.
                       2.  It would appear that when a consignment of instruments was being
               transported to a laboratory without any  consideration, pursuant to the agree-
               ment entered into between the parties, the same was seized by the Assistant State
               Tax Officer,  Kozhikode, on the ground that the goods were not accompanied
               with a tax invoice but were being transported under a delivery challan. Although
               the detained goods were subsequently released consequent to the petitioner fur-
               nishing a bank guarantee and a bond as provided under the  CGST Act and
               Rules, the petitioner thought it appropriate to obtain an Advance Ruling from
               the Authority for Advance Ruling (hereinafter referred to as the “AAR”), the 5th
               respondent herein, on the following question :
                       “Whether in the facts of the present case, the provision of specified med-
                       ical  instruments by the Applicant to  unrelated parties  like hospital(s),
                       Lab(s),  for  use without any consideration, constitutes a “supply” or
                       whether it constitutes  “movement of  goods otherwise than by way of
                       supply” as per provisions of the CGST/SGST Act, 2017?”
               The AAR, by Ext.P2 order dated 26-9-2018 [2018 (18) G.S.T.L. 109 (A.A.R. - GST)],
               held that the placement of specified medical instruments to unrelated customers
               like hospitals, laboratories etc., for their use without any consideration,  in the
               backdrop of an agreement containing minimum purchase obligation of products
               like reagents, calibrators,  disposables etc. for  a specified period constituted  a
               “composite supply”. It thereafter found that the principal supply in the said
               composite supply was of the transfer of right to use goods for any purpose which
                                    GST LAW TIMES      26th March 2020      167
   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76