https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784337 Whether the petitioner's services were wrongly treated as local supply on the premise that it acted as an "intermediary," thereby disentitling it to refund of accumulated/unutilized ITC. Relying on the principles applied in earlier HC decisions on intermediary characterization, the HC held that the petitioner was not an intermediary and that the services qualified as export of services, making the refund claim maintainable under the GST framework. Consequently, the impugned appellate and rejection orders were quashed, and the respondents were directed to sanction refund of the accumulated/unutilized ITC in the electronic credit ledger with applicable interest within three months, with the matter remanded for grant of refund. en-us Thu, 11 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 02 Jan 2026 07:51:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784337 Whether the petitioner's services were wrongly treated as local supply on the premise that it acted as an "intermediary," thereby disentitling it to refund of accumulated/unutilized ITC. Relying on the principles applied in earlier HC decisions on intermediary characterization, the HC held that the petitioner was not an intermediary and that the services qualified as export of services, making the refund claim maintainable under the GST framework. Consequently, the impugned appellate and rejection orders were quashed, and the respondents were directed to sanction refund of the accumulated/unutilized ITC in the electronic credit ledger with applicable interest within three months, with the matter remanded for grant of refund. Case-Laws GST Thu, 11 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784337