Back
G. S. KULKARNI, JITENDRA JAIN
Globolive 3D Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, Represented by the Secretary, Department of Revenue Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
G.S. Kulkarni, J.
1. Rule, made returnable forthwith. Respondents waive service. By consent of the parties, heard finally.
2. This is a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India whereby in the absence of an appellate tribunal being constituted, the petitioner is before the Court praying for setting aside an order dated 31 March, 2021 passed by the appellate authority, being an order passed by the Joint Commissioner, CGST and Central Excise Appeal-I, Mumbai, by which the respondent’s/department’s appeal, against granting of the petitioner’s refund application has been allowed, consequence being, declining of the refund of the tax paid by the petitioner.
3. The question which falls for determination is as to whether the services rendered by the petitioner of providing Satellite derived 3D model services, would fall within the purview of “export of services” as defined under Section 2(6) of the IGST Act or would be categorized as Online Information Database Access or Retrieval services as defined under Section 2(17) of the IGST Act, in the context of
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioner's services did not qualify as 'Intermediary Services' and that the place of supply of services was not in India as per the rele....
The court emphasized that for services to qualify as 'export of services', authorities must accurately ascertain the petitioner's role as an intermediary, citing inadequate findings in previous rulin....
Clinical research services on foreign client-supplied goods, performed in India but reports delivered abroad, qualify as export of service; Rule 4 of POPS Rules inapplicable as goods are altered, not....
The services provided were not intermediary services but on a principal-to-principal basis, justifying the refund of unutilized input tax credit as the denial was arbitrary and without jurisdiction.
The main legal point established is that the definition of 'intermediary' under the IGST Act does not include a person who provides services on his own account, and the determination of the place of ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the characterization of services as intermediary services under the IGST Act requires a careful analysis of the nature of the services provide....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
