CBIC就演示车辆的进项税额抵扣（ITC）资格发布澄清说明

CBIC received various representations with respect to the admissibility of Input Tax credits on demo vehicles in pursuance of Section 17(5) of the CGST Act. The demo vehicles are maintained by authorized dealers as per dealership norms and are used for providing a trial run and for demonstrating features of the vehicle to potential buyers.

授权经销商通常会凭税务发票从汽车制造商处购入演示车辆，并在其账簿中将其列为固定资产。在经过特定期限后，授权经销商可能会以账面净值出售此类车辆，并按规定缴纳相应税款。

CBIC已发布第231/25/2024-GST号通告（日期为2024年9月10日），就演示车辆的进项税抵扣（ITC）合规性进行了澄清。该通告详细内容如下：

1. 需要澄清的问题有哪些？

CBIC已就以下事项作出澄清：

1. 根据《CGST法案》第17(5)条
2. ，演示车辆进项税抵扣的适用性，以及授权经销商在账簿中将演示车辆资本化后的进项税抵扣适用性。

2. 澄清说明

CBIC作出如下澄清：

2.1 根据《CGST法案》第17(5)条，演示车辆进项税抵扣的合规性

a. 相关法律条款

• 关于机动车进项税抵扣的限制规定见于《CGST法案》第17(5)条。
• 根据《CGST法案》第17(5)(a)条，对于核定载客人数不超过13人（含驾驶员）的机动车，若非用于以下应税供应，则不得抵扣进项税：
  • 此类机动车的后续供应；
  • 客运服务；
  • 提供此类机动车的驾驶培训。

b. 演示车辆进项税抵扣的合规性

• CBIC明确指出，法律旨在根据使用此类机动车所进行的对外应税供应性质，将特定情形排除在进项税抵扣限制之外。
• 允许排除在抵扣限制之外的应税供应包括：
  • 此类机动车的后续供应、
  • 客运服务以及
  • 提供此类机动车的驾驶培训。

• 授权经销商使用演示车辆是为了提供试驾并向潜在买家展示车辆功能。因此，演示车辆不能被视为用于提供客运应税供应或驾驶培训。故此，演示车辆不属于《CGST法案》第17(5)(a)条第(B)项和第(C)项所规定的排除范围。

• 因此，核心问题在于演示车辆是否可被视为用于进行《CGST法案》第17(5)(a)条第(A)项所规定的“此类机动车的后续供应”。

• 关于进项税抵扣限制，《CGST法案》第17(5)(a)条第(A)项使用的是“此类机动车”（such motor vehicles）而非“所述机动车”（said motor vehicle）。这意味着法律的本意不仅是排除自身进行后续供应的机动车，还包括用于促进同类机动车后续供应的机动车。

• 演示车辆有助于潜在买家决定购买特定类型的机动车。因此，演示车辆起到了促进同类机动车销售的作用，可以被视为用于进行“此类机动车的后续供应”。

• 据此，演示车辆的进项税抵扣不受《CGST法案》第17(5)(a)条的限制，因为它已通过该条款的第(A)项被排除在外。

c. 非演示用途机动车的进项税抵扣合规性

• There may be some cases where specified motor vehicles are used by an authorized dealer for other purposes such as transportation of its staff employees/ management etc.
• In such cases, the same cannot be said to be used for making ‘further supply of such motor vehicles’.
• Therefore, ITC in respect of such motor vehicles shall be restricted under Section 17(5)(a) of the CGST Act

d. ITC where authorised dealers act as a service provider

• There may be cases where the authorized dealer merely acts as an agent or service provider to the vehicle manufacturer for providing marketing services including service of the vehicle test drive on behalf of the manufacturer and is not directly involved in the purchase and sale of the vehicles.
• The sale invoice is directly issued by the manufacturer to the customer.
• For providing a test drive facility, the dealer purchases a demo vehicle from the vehicle manufacturer. The dealer may sell the said demo vehicle after a specified time or kilometers on payment of applicable GST.
• In such a case, the authorized dealer is merely providing marketing services to the vehicle manufacturer and is not making the supply of motor vehicles on his account.
• Therefore, such demo vehicles cannot be said to be used for making further supply of such motor vehicles.
• Accordingly, ITC in respect of such a demo vehicle would not be available to the said dealer.

2.2 ITC where demo vehicles are capitalized in the books of account by the authorized dealers.

• As per provisions of section 16(1) of the CGST Act, every registered taxpayer is entitled to take ITC on any supply of goods and services, where such goods or services are used in the course or furtherance of business subject to specified conditions.

• As per Section 2(52) of CGST Act, “goods” means every kind of movable property other than money and securities but includes actionable claims, growing crops, grass, and things attached to or forming part of the land which are agreed to be severed before supply or under a contract of supply.

• Further, as per section 2(19) of the CGST Act, “capital goods” means goods, the value of which is capitalized in the books of account of the person claiming the ITC and which are used or intended to be used in the course or furtherance of business.

• The demo vehicles are used by the authorized dealers to promote the further sale of similar motor vehicles and therefore, demo vehicles are used in the course or furtherance of the business of the authorized dealers.

• Where such vehicles are capitalized in the books of accounts by the authorized dealer, the said vehicle falls in the definition of “capital goods”.

• As per provisions of section 16(1) of the CGST Act, a recipient of goods is entitled to take ITC in respect of tax charged on the inward supply of any goods, which as per the definition of “goods” under section 2(52) of CGST Act, includes even capital goods.

• Further, as per section 2(19), the availability of ITC on demo vehicles is not affected by way of capitalization of such vehicles in the books of account of the authorized dealers, subject to the fact that such vehicles are used for the purpose or furtherance of business

• However, in the case of capitalization, the availability of ITC would be subject to provisions of section 16(3) of the CGST Act, which provides that where the registered person has claimed depreciation on the tax component of the cost of capital goods and plant and machinery under the Income-tax Act, 1961, the ITC on the said tax component shall not be allowed.

• Further, in case of subsequent sale of capitalized demo vehicle, the authorized dealer shall have to pay an amount or tax as per provisions of section 18(6) of CGST Act read with rule 44(6) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017.

3. Conclusion:

Admissibility of ITC on demo cars has always been a matter of litigation and there have been many precedents issued on such matters taking different stands. This circular will bring uniformity and clarity on such matters and will reduce the litigations.