https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290473 The AAAR held that the appellant's marketing and handholding services constituted intermediary services under section 2(13) of IGST Act, 2017, rather than support services. The appellant facilitated investment consultancy services between a US-based consultant manager and prospective investors, receiving consideration only upon successful deal completion. Since the appellant did not provide main services from its own account but merely facilitated transactions between parties, it qualified as an intermediary. The services were classified under SAC 9997. However, the AAAR declined to rule on export classification, determining that place of supply issues were beyond advance ruling scope. en-us Wed, 20 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 12 Mar 2025 17:31:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290473 The AAAR held that the appellant's marketing and handholding services constituted intermediary services under section 2(13) of IGST Act, 2017, rather than support services. The appellant facilitated investment consultancy services between a US-based consultant manager and prospective investors, receiving consideration only upon successful deal completion. Since the appellant did not provide main services from its own account but merely facilitated transactions between parties, it qualified as an intermediary. The services were classified under SAC 9997. However, the AAAR declined to rule on export classification, determining that place of supply issues were beyond advance ruling scope. Case-Laws GST Wed, 20 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290473