https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771867 Karnataka HC held that petitioner's services constituted export services under IGST Act, not intermediary services. The court examined service agreements establishing petitioner acted as independent contractor performing market surveys, factory identification, monitoring, and shipment tracking for foreign recipients. Distinguishing from agency relationships, the court found petitioner operated on own account making profits rather than arranging supplies for others. Relying on Amazon Development Centre precedent and Supreme Court's Bharati Cellular decision on agency versus distributorship, HC concluded services qualified as exports. Refund claims were held not time-barred under CGST Act Section 54. Orders rejecting ITC refunds and demanding service tax were quashed. Petition allowed in part. en-us Sat, 26 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Jun 2025 11:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771867 Karnataka HC held that petitioner's services constituted export services under IGST Act, not intermediary services. The court examined service agreements establishing petitioner acted as independent contractor performing market surveys, factory identification, monitoring, and shipment tracking for foreign recipients. Distinguishing from agency relationships, the court found petitioner operated on own account making profits rather than arranging supplies for others. Relying on Amazon Development Centre precedent and Supreme Court's Bharati Cellular decision on agency versus distributorship, HC concluded services qualified as exports. Refund claims were held not time-barred under CGST Act Section 54. Orders rejecting ITC refunds and demanding service tax were quashed. Petition allowed in part. Case-Laws GST Sat, 26 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771867