Case Law Details
Tvl. Toll Global Forwarding (India) Private Limited Vs State of Tamil Nadu (Madras High Court)
The Madras High Court admitted writ petitions challenging a show cause notice dated 31.07.2025 and the consequential GST demand order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 11.12.2025 issued against a logistics and forwarding service provider. The petitioner contended that the services rendered to overseas clients qualified as “export of services” under Section 2(6) of the IGST Act and constituted zero-rated supplies under Section 16, pursuant to which a refund of input tax credit amounting to Rs.67,18,292 had been sanctioned.
The authorities, however, alleged that the services were “intermediary services” under Section 2(13) of the IGST Act and, by virtue of Section 13(8)(b), the place of supply was within India, thereby disqualifying them as exports. The Court observed that the issue required detailed consideration and admitted the petitions. Considering the recovery proceedings initiated for Rs.1,49,62,013, the Court granted interim protection by directing the petitioner to deposit Rs.1.80 crore within 30 days, upon which all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order would remain in abeyance pending further hearing.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
These Writ Petitions are filed challenging the impugned show cause notice dated 31.07.2025 and the consequential order passed in Form GST DRC – 07 dated 11.12.2025 by the respondents.
2. The petitioner is engaged in the business of providing logistics and forwarding services to overseas clients. It is stated that the services rendered qualify as “export of services” under Section 2(6) of the IGST Act, 2017 and are treated as zero-rated supplies under Section 16 of the IGST Act, 2017.
3. It is further stated that the petitioner had effected export turnover to the tune of Rs.42,66,306/- out of the total turnover of Rs.55,50,61,261/- and had claimed refund of input tax credit amounting to Rs.67,18,292/-, which was sanctioned.
4. Subsequently, the respondents issued the impugned show cause notice alleging that the services rendered fall within the ambit of “intermediate services” as defined under Section 2(13) of the IGST Act, 2017.
5. According to the respondents, in terms of Section 13(8)(b) of the IGST Act, 2017, the place of supply is within India and therefore the services would not qualify as export of services.
6. Pursuant thereto, the respondents passed the impugned order dated 11.12.2025 confirming the demand and initiating recovery proceedings.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the respondents.
8. The issue that arises for consideration is whether the services rendered would qualify as export of services under Section 2(6) read with Section 16 of the IGST Act or fall within the ambit of intermediary services under Section 2(13) attracting Section 13(8)(b).
9. This Court is of the view that the issue requires detailed consideration. Hence, the writ petitions are admitted.
10. Notice to the respondents returnable by 23.05.2026. Mr.C.Harsharaj, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents and seeks time to file counter affidavit.
11. Considering that recovery proceedings have been initiated for a sum of Rs.1,49,62,013/-, this Court is inclined to grant interim protection subject to condition.
12. The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.1,80,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Eighty Lakhs Only) within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
13. Upon such deposit, all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order shall be kept in abeyance.
14. List these cases on 23.04.2026 for filing counter affidavit and for further orders.
Author Bio
