Page 148 - GSTL_23rd July 2020_Vol 38_Part 4

514 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 38
ings, supplies have been treated as composite and naturally bundled, even
though they may be compulsory in certain cases.
33. Supplies under Click program being consumed at different points
of time does not alter the fact that the supply is a bundled supply.
With respect to the above ground, we have provided our detailed sub-
mission in para 26 of our Grounds of Appeal. Further to these submissions, we
additionally wish to submit as under :
Finding in the impugned order
34. The Impugned Order has observed that the supply of Electro Ink
and other consumables in a bundle to customers have different shelf life and ac-
cordingly cannot be treated as supplied in conjunction to each other. The rele-
vant portions of the Impugned Order at page 14 are extracted below :
“The Applicant submits ……… all such supplies are required to be con-
sumed together in order to produce desired output. He therefore submits
that the goods are supplied in conjunction to each other in the ordinary
course of business. However, we find that this submission and argument is con-
trary to their own admission that every product supplied herein has a separate
lifespan independent of each other.”
[Emphasis supplied]
35. The Appellant submits that the consumption pattern of the con-
sumables may vary vis-a-vis each other. However, this fact does not in anyway
conclude that the consumables are not supplied in conjunction with each other as
there is no pre-requirement or condition that the goods should have the same
consumption pattern to be treated as supplied in conjunction to each other.
36. To illustrate, the Appellant’s submit that the supply of mosquito
coils with the “stand” is a composite supply. However, the burner may have a
different shelf life in the sense that a single “stand” may be used multiple times
for use of burning multiple coils. This does not make the supply of “coil stand”
and “coils” as a mixed supply.
37. Similarly, for the Appellant, the supply of Electroink and consuma-
bles may have different consumption pattern, but that does not change the na-
ture of the supply from being “naturally bundled”.
38. The fact of transfer of property, supply on conjunction with each
other, continuous supply and billing based on consumption and statement of
accounts have been accepted and not disputed. While so, the aspect relating to
different lifespan should not be a criterion to determine whether the supplies are
naturally bundled.
39. Supplies are made in ordinary course of business
With respect to the above ground, we have provided our detailed sub-
mission in para II of our Grounds of Appeal. Further to these submissions, we
additionally wish to submit as under :
Findings in the Impugned Order
Para 5.4 at page 14
“... He therefore submits that the goods are supplied in conjunction
to each other in the ordinary course of business. However, we find
that this submission and argument is contrary to their own admis-
sion that every product supplied herein has a separate lifespan in-
dependent of each other.”
GST LAW TIMES  23rd July 2020  148