<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>CESTAT Rules Marketing Services to Foreign Parent as Export, Not Intermediary, Under Rule 2(f) of Service Rules</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90180</link>
    <description>The CESTAT overturned the impugned order that classified the appellant&#039;s services as those of an &#039;intermediary&#039; under Rule 2(f) of the Place of Provision of Services Rules, 2012, holding this classification unsustainable. The tribunal found that the appellant&#039;s provision of marketing, promotional, and after-sales services to its foreign parent entity constituted export of services under the relevant Export Rules, as the benefit of such services accrued outside India. Consequently, the denial of refund claims was set aside, and the appellant was held eligible for refund of Cenvat credit under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The appeal was allowed, confirming the appellant&#039;s status as an exporter rather than an intermediary.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2025 08:42:50 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2025 08:42:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=834147" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>CESTAT Rules Marketing Services to Foreign Parent as Export, Not Intermediary, Under Rule 2(f) of Service Rules</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90180</link>
      <description>The CESTAT overturned the impugned order that classified the appellant&#039;s services as those of an &#039;intermediary&#039; under Rule 2(f) of the Place of Provision of Services Rules, 2012, holding this classification unsustainable. The tribunal found that the appellant&#039;s provision of marketing, promotional, and after-sales services to its foreign parent entity constituted export of services under the relevant Export Rules, as the benefit of such services accrued outside India. Consequently, the denial of refund claims was set aside, and the appellant was held eligible for refund of Cenvat credit under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The appeal was allowed, confirming the appellant&#039;s status as an exporter rather than an intermediary.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2025 08:42:50 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90180</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>