Software, SaaS or consulting? Prepare the authority-route question

Describe the exported deliverable clearly before selecting a software or other-service preparation route.

An invoice label such as consulting may be too broad to explain what was actually delivered. A project can contain advice, code, access rights or digital material. Start with a factual description and ask the appropriate authority how it treats that deliverable; do not choose a category solely because a form is easier.

Describe the deliverable and contract scope

Write what the customer receives, how it is delivered and what the invoice covers. Separate recurring access, development milestones and advisory work when your documents do. Keep the contract, statement of work and invoice consistent. Avoid assuming that a digital delivery method alone resolves every classification issue, or that a tax label automatically decides the foreign-exchange route.

Confirm the establishment and authority context

Record whether the exporting establishment is in a domestic tariff area or SEZ and identify any existing STPI or other authority correspondence. Ask how your current process applies to the specific work and whether older records need separate handling. Preserve the response before changing a recurring workflow. The Braininnx builder organises information; it does not issue a classification ruling.

Write a deliverable inventory before selecting a route

List what the customer receives under the contract: code, hosted access, technical advice, data processing, documentation or another output. Identify how each component is priced and delivered. A broad invoice label such as IT consulting may not explain the actual exported work. Keep the scope and milestone references available for the authority reviewing classification.

Use plain language first. Avoid selecting a familiar remittance code or tax classification merely because the number appears in a tutorial. Different classifications can serve different systems. Where one engagement combines work types, explain the components and ask whether the authority wants separate treatment. Do not split a genuine combined transaction artificially just to obtain a simpler route.

Identify the establishment and existing workflow

Record the exporting entity and establishment context, including any SEZ, STPI or other authority relationship actually relevant to the work. Keep earlier acknowledgements and process instructions available. A different authority route may require information that a general service worksheet does not resolve. Ask the appropriate institution how it wants the current deliverable handled.

If you already use an older recurring process, describe it in the enquiry and ask about transition or duplicate-reporting risks. Do not abandon old references without instructions or submit the same export through several routes in the hope one will be accepted. Keep a written record of the route confirmed and the categories or periods to which the answer applies.

Review recurring subscriptions and mixed milestones

For recurring work, keep the billing period, customer or account reference and contract scope visible. Distinguish a subscription invoice from a development milestone or professional-services invoice when the documents do. If a service changes materially, revisit the earlier classification response rather than treating it as a permanent approval for all digital revenue.

Use your internal product description to help the reviewer understand what is supplied, but avoid marketing language that hides the commercial substance. A clear summary might describe hosted access and the separately contracted implementation work. Ask the authority to resolve the route and required evidence. Keep that answer alongside the source documents so the preparation tool remains an organiser rather than an unsupported classifier.

A fictional example

A business invoices for a technical review and a separate code milestone. It explains both deliverables and asks whether they need distinct treatment rather than calling the entire project general consulting to avoid a software-route question.

Preparation checklist

Describe what was delivered, not just your job title.
Check the establishment context.
Preserve the authority’s classification response.

Can Braininnx automatically choose a software authority for me?

It can highlight the questions, but the appropriate authority and bank must confirm the route for your facts.

FICTIONAL WALKTHROUGH

A contract combines hosted access and implementation

A fictional company sells recurring hosted access and a separate implementation milestone. Its preparation note lists both deliverables, their invoice references and the actual exporting establishment. It does not call the entire arrangement general consulting because that option appears first in a form.
The company supplies the contract scope and asks the relevant authority about the route and any separate treatment needed. Existing acknowledgements from its older workflow are included as references where relevant. The team avoids duplicate submissions while waiting for the instruction.
The confirmed response is stored in a classification register with its scope and source date. A later contract adding a materially different deliverable triggers another review rather than automatic reuse of the earlier conclusion.

Your next step

Read the software export guide

Sources and scope

Sources reviewed 9 October 2026. The routines and fictional examples are editorial preparation suggestions. They do not confirm your bank’s acceptance, classification or transaction status.