2025 (5) TMI 729

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s to whether the Petitioners qualify as "Intermediary" under Section 13 (8) read with Section 2 (13) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 ("IGST Act") and therefore are being taken up together for disposal. 4. Writ Petition No. 5144/2022 is for the period March 2019 to April 2020, where IGST of Rs. 5,87,01,143 paid by the Petitioner on services supplied by them to IDP Australia, calling it to be export of service, under Section 2 (6) of the IGST Act, is rejected. Similarly, Writ Petition No. 2774/2024 is for the period April 2020 - March 2021, where IGST of Rs.3,86,43,301, paid on services supplied to IDP Australia, claiming it to be export, is rejected. 5. At the outset, the Petitioner is not pressing prayer clause (a) in W....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lso the case of the Petitioner that for the period prior to introduction of the GST regime, the same issue was agitated by the Revenue and the issue came to be settled in favour of the Petitioner vide CESTAT's Final Order dated 28th October 2021 covering the period April 2014 to September 2015. This Order of CESTAT was challenged before the Delhi High Court and was dismissed due to delay. 9. Further, the Petitioner submits that the CBIC, vide its Circular No. 159/15/2021-GST dated 20.09.2021, has clarified that the concept of intermediary was borrowed in GST from the Service tax regime and broadly there is no change in the scope of intermediary services in the GST regime vis-a-vis the Service tax regime. There being no change in the facts ....