https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778245 The dominant issue was whether the petitioner's GST services constituted "intermediary" services or "export of services." Applying the statutory requirement that an intermediary arrangement must involve three parties and facilitation between two others, the HC held that only two parties were involved under the specific contract- the petitioner and an overseas recipient-so the petitioner could not be treated as an intermediary. As the services were rendered solely to the overseas recipient, they qualified as export of services, and a contrary departmental view was unwarranted. The petition was allowed. en-us Thu, 04 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Dec 2025 17:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778245 The dominant issue was whether the petitioner's GST services constituted "intermediary" services or "export of services." Applying the statutory requirement that an intermediary arrangement must involve three parties and facilitation between two others, the HC held that only two parties were involved under the specific contract- the petitioner and an overseas recipient-so the petitioner could not be treated as an intermediary. As the services were rendered solely to the overseas recipient, they qualified as export of services, and a contrary departmental view was unwarranted. The petition was allowed. Case-Laws GST Thu, 04 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778245