Educational Consultancy Services For Foreign Universities Qualify As Export Of Service, Entitled To GST Refund: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that foreign education consultancy services to students in exchange for admission based commission from foreign universities qualify as 'export of services'.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain thus held that Global Opportunities Private Limited will be entitled to claim GST refund on export of services under Section 54 of the Central...
The Delhi High Court has held that foreign education consultancy services to students in exchange for admission based commission from foreign universities qualify as 'export of services'.
A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain thus held that Global Opportunities Private Limited will be entitled to claim GST refund on export of services under Section 54 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017.
The Court further added that the entity cannot be termed as a mere agent or intermediary of the foreign universities to deny its claim for refund. It observed,
“Relationship between the Respondent and the university or the FEI cannot be held to be an intermediary service as the Respondent is working as an educational consultant and may be rendering services which may further the cause of the FEI but is not an agent of the said FEI.”
Reliance was placed on Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Chandigarh-I v. Oceanic Consultant Pvt. Ltd., (2025) where the Supreme Court dismissed the SLP against a CESTAT order which held that when services are rendered to students in India, foreign universities which pay the commission to such a person as the Respondent cannot be considered as an 'intermediary'.
The GST Department was aggrieved by an order of the Appellate Authority, granting refund to the Respondent-entity. It argued that in order for a service to constitute export of services, the relationship ought to be one of Principal to Principal and not Principal and Agent.
Since the Respondent is nothing but an agent of the Principal i.e., the University, it ought to be deemed as if the University itself is receiving the amount and, therefore, there is no person to whom the services are provided by the Respondent, the Department argued.
It was also contended that under Section 13(8) of the IGST Act, the location of the supplier of services is deemed to be the place of supply. Therefore, the Respondent does not qualify for its services being treated as export of services as it is based in Delhi.
Disagreeing, the High Court observed that 'intermediary services' are no longer services for which the place of location of the supplier would be deemed as the place of supply.
“Even for such services the place of the recipient of the services would be place of supply as per Section 13(2) of the IGST Act,” the Court said.
In this regard it noted that the GST Council in its 56th meeting had also recommended omission of Clause (b) of Section 13(8) of the IGST Act to help Indian exporters to claim export benefits.
As such, the Court dismissed the Department's plea.
Appearance: Mr. Sameer Vashisht, SSC with Ms. Urvi Mohan, Mr. Naman Jain with Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advs. for Petitioner; Mr. Tarun Gulati, Sr. Adv with Mr. Sparsh Bhargava, Ms. Ishita Farsaiya, Ms. Vanshika Taneja & Ms. Riddhi Vasistha, Advs. for Respondent
Case title: Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Service Tax DGST Delhi v. Global Opportunities Private Limited Through Its Authorized Representative
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1567
Case no.: W.P.(C) 10189/2025