https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766815 Promotional and marketing support services performed on a principal-to-principal basis for an overseas recipient were not intermediary services where the appellant acted as an independent contractor, had no authority to bind the foreign entity, and merely rendered services on its own account; the services were therefore treated as export of services. Refund of accumulated credit under Rule 5 could not be denied in isolation on the ground that the underlying services were allegedly non-export or wrongly classified, because the department was first required to pursue proper demand or recovery proceedings if it disputed the tax character of the services. The refund denial was unsustainable and the assessee's claim was restored with consequential relief. en-us Tue, 04 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Mar 2025 07:49:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766815 Promotional and marketing support services performed on a principal-to-principal basis for an overseas recipient were not intermediary services where the appellant acted as an independent contractor, had no authority to bind the foreign entity, and merely rendered services on its own account; the services were therefore treated as export of services. Refund of accumulated credit under Rule 5 could not be denied in isolation on the ground that the underlying services were allegedly non-export or wrongly classified, because the department was first required to pursue proper demand or recovery proceedings if it disputed the tax character of the services. The refund denial was unsustainable and the assessee's claim was restored with consequential relief. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 04 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766815