Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
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.
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.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.