Voluntary withdrawal in Advance Ruling clarifies service status under IGST Act

The Authority for Advance Ruling disposed of the case as withdrawn after the Applicant voluntarily withdrew the application based on a CBIC circular clarifying the status of services under the IGST Act, 2017. The ruling provided closure to the ambiguity regarding whether the services supplied qualified as an export of service or if the Applicant qualified as an "Intermediary" under the Act.

---

---

Issues:
1. Determination of whether services supplied qualify as an export of service under IGST Act, 2017.
2. Assessment of whether the Applicant qualifies as an "Intermediary" under IGST Act, 2017.

Analysis:
1. The Applicant, a subsidiary of a US-based company, entered into a Service Agreement with a European entity for support services involving data analysis, marketing materials, and customer relations. The Applicant rented workspace and hired employees for service provision, with costs charged back to the recipient. The Agreement emphasized the independent nature of the Applicant's role, with no authority to negotiate contracts on behalf of the European entity. Payment was to be in USD, and a markup was agreed upon for services. Despite being offered a hearing opportunity, the Applicant opted to withdraw the application citing a CBIC circular providing clarity on the matter.

2. The Authority for Advance Ruling disposed of the application as withdrawn following the Applicant's voluntary and unconditional withdrawal based on the CBIC circular, which addressed the ambiguity for which the ruling was sought. The ruling clarified the status of the Applicant's services under the IGST Act, 2017, as an export of service or as an intermediary, providing closure to the advance ruling application process.

---