https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409635 AAR Kerala ruled that services provided by India branch to overseas customers under inter-company agreement with US parent company do not qualify as export of services under IGST Act Section 2(6). The legal fiction in Section 8 treats Indian establishment and foreign parent as distinct persons for GST purposes, making the US parent the actual recipient of services. Since supplier and recipient are establishments of the same distinct person, export conditions are not satisfied, making services liable to IGST. However, services became exempt from IGST from July 27, 2018 onwards under notification exemption. en-us Fri, 07 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Mar 2025 12:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409635 AAR Kerala ruled that services provided by India branch to overseas customers under inter-company agreement with US parent company do not qualify as export of services under IGST Act Section 2(6). The legal fiction in Section 8 treats Indian establishment and foreign parent as distinct persons for GST purposes, making the US parent the actual recipient of services. Since supplier and recipient are establishments of the same distinct person, export conditions are not satisfied, making services liable to IGST. However, services became exempt from IGST from July 27, 2018 onwards under notification exemption. Case-Laws GST Fri, 07 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409635