https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758928 CESTAT Chandigarh held that the appellant payment processing company was eligible for service tax refunds claimed. The tribunal determined that appellant operated on principal-to-principal basis with overseas client, not as intermediary, as no principal-agent relationship existed and appellant did not facilitate main accommodation services between the foreign platform and customers. The appellant provided back office payment processing services which qualified as export of services under Rule 6A of Service Tax Rules, making them eligible for refunds and not liable for service tax. The impugned orders were set aside and appeal was allowed. en-us Wed, 04 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 Sep 2024 11:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758928 CESTAT Chandigarh held that the appellant payment processing company was eligible for service tax refunds claimed. The tribunal determined that appellant operated on principal-to-principal basis with overseas client, not as intermediary, as no principal-agent relationship existed and appellant did not facilitate main accommodation services between the foreign platform and customers. The appellant provided back office payment processing services which qualified as export of services under Rule 6A of Service Tax Rules, making them eligible for refunds and not liable for service tax. The impugned orders were set aside and appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 04 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758928