https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379099 The AAAR upheld the AAR decision regarding classification of back office administrative and accounting support services. The appellant argued their services qualified as intermediary services under Section 2(13) of IGST Act, 2017, claiming they satisfied all three criteria: acting on behalf of clients, facilitating supply between two parties, and not providing goods on their own account. However, the AAAR found the appellant misconstrued the intermediary definition and confirmed the services were taxable, rejecting the zero-rated supply classification. The ruling emphasized that AAR decisions based on specific agreements cannot be generalized. en-us Tue, 26 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Mar 2025 12:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379099 The AAAR upheld the AAR decision regarding classification of back office administrative and accounting support services. The appellant argued their services qualified as intermediary services under Section 2(13) of IGST Act, 2017, claiming they satisfied all three criteria: acting on behalf of clients, facilitating supply between two parties, and not providing goods on their own account. However, the AAAR found the appellant misconstrued the intermediary definition and confirmed the services were taxable, rejecting the zero-rated supply classification. The ruling emphasized that AAR decisions based on specific agreements cannot be generalized. Case-Laws GST Tue, 26 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379099