Taxpayer falls within 'recipient' under IGST Act and entitled to GST refund despite non-compliance with section 2(6)(3)

Petitioner's SLP dismissed by SC. The Court upheld CESTAT's view that, given the GST Act's definition of "recipient" and "intermediary," the petitioner falls within the recipient definition and is entitled to refund of GST paid where consideration is received in foreign currency; non-compliance with sub-clause (3) of section 2(6) of the IGST Act did not preclude refund entitlement. The refund remains subject to actual receipt of consideration in foreign currency.

---

---

Having regard to the judgment dated 06.05.2025 in Civil Appeal Nos. 10815-10819/2014 (Commissioner of Service Tax III, Mumbai v. M/s. Vodafone India Ltd.) and connected matters, "these special leave petitions also stand dismissed." The Court further notes the dictum dated 04.11.2024 in SLP (C) No. 25992/2024 (Commissioner, Central Excise, CGST-Delhi South Commissionerate v. Blackberry India Pvt. Ltd.) as guiding authority. No separate reasons are recorded in this order; the dismissal is explicitly anchored to the earlier Supreme Court determination. All pending application(s) connected with these petitions "shall also stand disposed of." The operative outcome is therefore summary dismissal of the special leave petitions and disposal of attendant applications by reliance on prior precedent.

---