Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
Central Board of Excise & Customs
(Tax Research Unit)
Dated: November 4, 2009
Subject: Applicability of indirect taxes on packaged software - regarding -
The undersigned is directed to state that ‘Packaged Software’ is a type of IT software which caters to the needs of a variety of users and is capable of being used for variety of hardwares. IT software is fully exempt from basic customs duty being covered under Information Technology Agreement. So far as excise duty/CVD is concerned, while customised software is fully exempt, the packaged software attracts duty @ 8%.
2. Shrink wrap software is a type of packaged software which consists of a box containing software or software upgrade on media (i.e. CD/DVD), users manual and end-user licence agreements, which is shrink wrapped in plastic cover and is always sold as a set (without removing the plastic cover).
3. Normally, cost of a software supplied in a media consists of two cost components, namely,-
a. the cost of the actual software, i.e. set of information which is placed on a media; and
b. the cost of the intellectual property right (IPR) relating thereto.
4. In 2008 budget, the IPR portion of the cost of software was brought under the service tax net under a new taxable service ‘IT Software Service’ (ITSS). As per the definition, a service provided in relation to IT software for use in the course, or furtherance, of business or commerce was covered under this taxable service. In specifics, the taxable service included,-
…………………………………………….
(v) providing the right to use information technology software for commercial exploitation including right to reproduce, distribute and sell information technology software and right to use software components for the creation of and inclusion in other information technology software products,
(vi) providing the right to use information technology software supplied electronically and the term ‘service provider’ shall be construed accordingly.
5. In their pre-budget representations for the 2009 budget, the IT companies and their associations represented that if such IT software is imported, it is likely to be subjected to double taxation. While for calculating additional duty, the value of ‘right to use’ supplied alongwith the software would be included (as per the provisions of the Customs Valuation Rules) by the Customs authorities, the service tax authorities would charge service tax on the same value (i.e. on right to use) considering it to be import of ITSS.
6. Accepting their plea, in Budget 2009, two parallel notifications were issued on the excise and customs side. Vide notification no.22/2009-CE dated 07.07. 2009, partial exemption from excise duty was provided to packaged or canned software on that portion of the value which represents the consideration for the transfer of the right to use for commercial exploitation, as on this portion, service tax would be leviable under the ITSS. Similar exemption from CVD was provided vide notification No. 80/2009-Customs dated 07.07.2009 on such software. These exemptions were notified to ensure that while importing or manufacturing packaged software, the importer/manufacturer is spared from paying customs duty/excise duty on the value attributable to transfer of ‘right to use’.
7. It has been brought to the notice of the Board that some of the importers of shrink wrapped software have faced certain difficulties in availing of Notification No.80/2009-Customs dated 7.07.2009. It has been reported that their live consignments are held up, especially at Mumbai and Chennai cargo complexes. From the documents submitted by them it appears that two major objections have been raised at Mumbai and Chennai respectively.
8. It may be recalled that the first proviso of the said notification states that the exemption would be limited to that much of value which is towards right to use such software for commercial exploitation including the right to reproduce, distribute and sell such software and the right to use software components for creation of and inclusion in other information technology software products. In Mumbai, a view has been taken that the benefit of the notification is available only if all the activities, viz., right to reproduce, right to distribute, right to sell and right to use the software component for creation of and inclusion in other IT software products are fulfilled. Thus a conjunctive meaning of the term ‘and’ has been taken and it has been held that since the importer did not fulfill all the conditions, they should be denied the benefit of the notification.
9. In another case in Chennai, where fully packed product (FPP) was imported by a company which produced split value (i.e., one value for media CVD and other for right to use software) in a single invoice shown separately, the jurisdictional authorities have refused to accept such split value for the purpose of claiming notification No.80/2009-Customs and taken the view that CVD should be charged on entire amount.
10. The above instances show that the field formations have failed to appreciate the scope of the said notification. In the first case, the view taken by officers is legally untenable because the phrase used in notification No.80/2009-Cus is inclusive in nature and it is a well-known principle that in an inclusive expression, the word ‘and’ is to be understood as ‘or’ and that even if one of the activities (such as right to reproduce, right to distribute, right to sell etc.) mentioned in the said inclusive portion is carried out, it would satisfy the condition of commercial exploitation, thus making the import eligible for notification No.80/2009-Customs. As for the second case, the notification No.80/2009-Cus itself envisages splitting of the value of the imported goods into that pertaining to software on media and the one pertaining to right to use. In such cases, there is no rationale for the department to deny splitting of value unless there are reasons to believe that such a splitting has been done in order to evade payment of duty.
11. The assessment of the shrink wrapped packaged software may be done keeping in view the above directions.
112. This issues with the approval of the Member (Budget & ST).
F.No.354/189/2009-TRU
Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
Central Board of Excise & Customs
(Tax Research Unit)
Dated: November 4, 2009
Subject: Applicability of indirect taxes on packaged software - regarding -
The undersigned is directed to state that ‘Packaged Software’ is a type of IT software which caters to the needs of a variety of users and is capable of being used for variety of hardwares. IT software is fully exempt from basic customs duty being covered under Information Technology Agreement. So far as excise duty/CVD is concerned, while customised software is fully exempt, the packaged software attracts duty @ 8%.
2. Shrink wrap software is a type of packaged software which consists of a box containing software or software upgrade on media (i.e. CD/DVD), users manual and end-user licence agreements, which is shrink wrapped in plastic cover and is always sold as a set (without removing the plastic cover).
3. Normally, cost of a software supplied in a media consists of two cost components, namely,-
a. the cost of the actual software, i.e. set of information which is placed on a media; and
b. the cost of the intellectual property right (IPR) relating thereto.
4. In 2008 budget, the IPR portion of the cost of software was brought under the service tax net under a new taxable service ‘IT Software Service’ (ITSS). As per the definition, a service provided in relation to IT software for use in the course, or furtherance, of business or commerce was covered under this taxable service. In specifics, the taxable service included,-
…………………………………………….
(v) providing the right to use information technology software for commercial exploitation including right to reproduce, distribute and sell information technology software and right to use software components for the creation of and inclusion in other information technology software products,
(vi) providing the right to use information technology software supplied electronically and the term ‘service provider’ shall be construed accordingly.
5. In their pre-budget representations for the 2009 budget, the IT companies and their associations represented that if such IT software is imported, it is likely to be subjected to double taxation. While for calculating additional duty, the value of ‘right to use’ supplied alongwith the software would be included (as per the provisions of the Customs Valuation Rules) by the Customs authorities, the service tax authorities would charge service tax on the same value (i.e. on right to use) considering it to be import of ITSS.
6. Accepting their plea, in Budget 2009, two parallel notifications were issued on the excise and customs side. Vide notification no.22/2009-CE dated 07.07. 2009, partial exemption from excise duty was provided to packaged or canned software on that portion of the value which represents the consideration for the transfer of the right to use for commercial exploitation, as on this portion, service tax would be leviable under the ITSS. Similar exemption from CVD was provided vide notification No. 80/2009-Customs dated 07.07.2009 on such software. These exemptions were notified to ensure that while importing or manufacturing packaged software, the importer/manufacturer is spared from paying customs duty/excise duty on the value attributable to transfer of ‘right to use’.
7. It has been brought to the notice of the Board that some of the importers of shrink wrapped software have faced certain difficulties in availing of Notification No.80/2009-Customs dated 7.07.2009. It has been reported that their live consignments are held up, especially at Mumbai and Chennai cargo complexes. From the documents submitted by them it appears that two major objections have been raised at Mumbai and Chennai respectively.
8. It may be recalled that the first proviso of the said notification states that the exemption would be limited to that much of value which is towards right to use such software for commercial exploitation including the right to reproduce, distribute and sell such software and the right to use software components for creation of and inclusion in other information technology software products. In Mumbai, a view has been taken that the benefit of the notification is available only if all the activities, viz., right to reproduce, right to distribute, right to sell and right to use the software component for creation of and inclusion in other IT software products are fulfilled. Thus a conjunctive meaning of the term ‘and’ has been taken and it has been held that since the importer did not fulfill all the conditions, they should be denied the benefit of the notification.
9. In another case in Chennai, where fully packed product (FPP) was imported by a company which produced split value (i.e., one value for media CVD and other for right to use software) in a single invoice shown separately, the jurisdictional authorities have refused to accept such split value for the purpose of claiming notification No.80/2009-Customs and taken the view that CVD should be charged on entire amount.
10. The above instances show that the field formations have failed to appreciate the scope of the said notification. In the first case, the view taken by officers is legally untenable because the phrase used in notification No.80/2009-Cus is inclusive in nature and it is a well-known principle that in an inclusive expression, the word ‘and’ is to be understood as ‘or’ and that even if one of the activities (such as right to reproduce, right to distribute, right to sell etc.) mentioned in the said inclusive portion is carried out, it would satisfy the condition of commercial exploitation, thus making the import eligible for notification No.80/2009-Customs. As for the second case, the notification No.80/2009-Cus itself envisages splitting of the value of the imported goods into that pertaining to software on media and the one pertaining to right to use. In such cases, there is no rationale for the department to deny splitting of value unless there are reasons to believe that such a splitting has been done in order to evade payment of duty.
11. The assessment of the shrink wrapped packaged software may be done keeping in view the above directions.
112. This issues with the approval of the Member (Budget & ST).
F.No.354/189/2009-TRU
No comments:
Post a Comment