The CESTAT held that the appellant's services could not be...

The CESTAT held that the appellant's services could not be classified as intermediary services for the period July 2012 to March 2014. As per Rule 3 of the Place of Provision of Services Rules, the place of provision was the location of the service recipient outside India. Since payment was received in convertible foreign exchange, the services qualified as export of services u/r 6 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. Consequently, no service tax was leviable, and the demand was set aside. The appeal was allowed.