The Karnataka High Court has ruled in favour of Bengaluru-based Excelpoint Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd., setting aside GST authorities’ orders that had denied a refund of over ₹18.92 lakh. The court held that the marketing and technical support services provided by the company to its Singapore parent did not qualify as “intermediary services” and therefore amounted to export of services under the Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) Act.
The judgment was delivered by Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar while allowing a writ petition filed by the company challenging the rejection of its refund claim.
Read also:- Calcutta High Court Flags Delay in Murder Trial, Seeks Change of Public Prosecutor in Long-Pending Bail Case
Background of the Case
Excelpoint Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd. had entered into a service agreement dated April 1, 2021, with Excelpoint Systems Pte. Ltd., Singapore. Under the agreement, the Indian entity provided marketing support and technical support services related to the Singapore company’s software and hardware products.
For the period between April 2021 and March 2022, the Indian company filed a refund claim of ₹18,92,697, treating the services as export of services supplied without payment of tax. The refund application was submitted on January 5, 2023.
However, the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax rejected the claim, holding that the services were “intermediary services” and therefore taxable in India. This decision was later upheld by the Joint Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals).
Tax Department’s Stand
The GST authorities took the view that Excelpoint India was facilitating sales and post-sale support for its foreign parent and its customers. According to the department, this involved three parties-the foreign principal, the Indian subsidiary, and end customers-bringing the services within the definition of intermediary services under Section 2(13) of the IGST Act.
Since intermediary services are deemed to have their place of supply in India, the department concluded that the services did not qualify as exports. On this basis, the refund claim was rejected despite the company having received payment in foreign currency.
Appearing for Excelpoint Systems, counsel argued that the company was providing services on a principal-to-principal basis and not acting as an agent or broker for its Singapore parent. It was submitted that the Indian entity did not arrange or facilitate the supply of goods but rendered independent support services.
The petitioner also relied on earlier decisions of the Karnataka High Court and pointed out that under the pre-GST service tax regime, the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) had already held that similar services provided by the company were not intermediary services.
The tax department, on the other hand, defended the appellate order and maintained that the nature of services squarely fell within the intermediary category.
Court’s Observations
After examining the service agreements and the material on record, the High Court disagreed with the department’s interpretation. The bench observed that merely providing marketing or technical support to a foreign parent company does not automatically make the Indian entity an intermediary.
“The material on record clearly indicates that the petitioner is not an intermediary and the services supplied amount to export of services,” the court noted.
Read also:- Bombay High Court Clears Way for Dalmia Cement, Orders Full Two-Year Extension of Mining Lease
Justice Krishna Kumar relied on recent Karnataka High Court judgments, including cases involving Amazon Development Centre India, Columbia Sportswear India Sourcing, Athene Technologies India, and Nokia Solutions & Networks India, where similar services were held to qualify as exports.
The court also found fault with the authorities for ignoring binding precedents and for failing to properly appreciate the nature of the contractual relationship.
Final Decision
Allowing the writ petition, the High Court set aside both the order-in-original dated March 2, 2023, and the appellate order dated June 12, 2024.
The court directed the GST authorities to refund ₹18,92,697 to Excelpoint Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd., along with applicable interest. The refund is to be sanctioned within three months from the date of receipt of the judgment.
Case Title: M/s Excelpoint Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs Joint Commissioner of Central Tax & Anr.
Case No.: WP No. 25598 of 2024 (T-RES)
Case Type: GST Refund – Writ Petition
Decision Date: 27 November 2025
