The HC held that the petitioner was providing export of services...

The HC held that the petitioner was providing export of services to its US parent company, not intermediary services. The petitioner assisted the parent in business consultancy by setting up meetings with experts/clients and providing advisory services. The payment terms showed the petitioner earned 8% markup, operating independently. Following Ernst & Young, since the recipient was outside India, the services qualified as export u/s 2(6) IGST Act. The HC set aside the orders treating it as intermediary service and directed processing of the refund claim as export of services filed within limitation.