In the Type-3 Test, human intervention is involved merely for ensuring accuracy of the algorithm and there is no direct submission of question paper from the test taker to the human evaluator and hence, the Type 3 test fulfils all essential requirements to be classified as an OIDAR service.
Classification of service- This is an appeal filed by the Department against the ruling given by the Authority for Advance Ruling in the case of M/s Ncs pearson inc.
The appeal is on the limited aspect of the classification of the Type-3 test administrative solution offered by the Respondent Company to its clients in India. The lower Authority had held that the Type-3 test does not qualify for classification as OIDAR service. The Department is aggrieved by this decision and has come before us in appeal. The Appellant Department has contended that the Type-3 test has all the ingredients of an OIDAR service and the lower Authority has erred in not classifying the same as OIDAR service.
Held that- When the Type-3 computer-based test is viewed as a whole, the scoring done by the human scorer is to be regarded as being within the realm of minimum human intervention. As such the ingredient of ‘minimum human intervention’ required to classify the service as OIDAR is also satisfied. We therefore, disagree with the decision of the lower Authority that the Type-3 test is not an OIDAR service.
We hold that service provided for the Type-3 test is classifiable as an OIDAR service.
In the Type-3 Test, human intervention is involved merely for ensuring accuracy of the algorithm and there is no direct submission of question paper from the test taker to the human evaluator and hence, the Type 3 test fulfils all essential requirements to be classified as an OIDAR service.
Classification of service- This is an appeal filed by the Department against the ruling given by the Authority for Advance Ruling in the case of M/s Ncs pearson inc.
The appeal is on the limited aspect of the classification of the Type-3 test administrative solution offered by the Respondent Company to its clients in India. The lower Authority had held that the Type-3 test does not qualify for classification as OIDAR service. The Department is aggrieved by this decision and has come before us in appeal. The Appellant Department has contended that the Type-3 test has all the ingredients of an OIDAR service and the lower Authority has erred in not classifying the same as OIDAR service.
Held that- When the Type-3 computer-based test is viewed as a whole, the scoring done by the human scorer is to be regarded as being within the realm of minimum human intervention. As such the ingredient of ‘minimum human intervention’ required to classify the service as OIDAR is also satisfied. We therefore, disagree with the decision of the lower Authority that the Type-3 test is not an OIDAR service.
We hold that service provided for the Type-3 test is classifiable as an OIDAR service.