https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450480 The AAR, Karnataka ruled that an applicant operating a digital gold platform must be treated as an electronic commerce operator under GST law, not as an agent. Despite the applicant's contention that they merely collect commission and facilitate transactions between buyers and sellers through an escrow account, the AAR held that they fall within the definition of e-commerce operator under Section 2(45) of CGST Act 2017. Consequently, the applicant is required to collect tax at source under Section 52 and obtain compulsory registration under Section 24(x) read with Rule 12 of CGST Rules 2017, rejecting their claim for agent status exclusion. en-us Wed, 28 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Apr 2025 16:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450480 The AAR, Karnataka ruled that an applicant operating a digital gold platform must be treated as an electronic commerce operator under GST law, not as an agent. Despite the applicant's contention that they merely collect commission and facilitate transactions between buyers and sellers through an escrow account, the AAR held that they fall within the definition of e-commerce operator under Section 2(45) of CGST Act 2017. Consequently, the applicant is required to collect tax at source under Section 52 and obtain compulsory registration under Section 24(x) read with Rule 12 of CGST Rules 2017, rejecting their claim for agent status exclusion. Case-Laws GST Wed, 28 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450480