The Delhi High Court clarified that Indian entities providing marketing, counselling, recruitment support, and educational consultancy services to foreign universities cannot automatically be treated as “intermediaries” under GST law. Fateh Education Consulting Private Limited, which had filed a refund claim of Rs 2.63 crore towards Integrated GST (IGST) paid on export of services for the period September 2023 to March 2024. However, the GST department rejected the refund by alleging that the company was acting as an intermediary for foreign universities.
The Delhi High Court set aside the rejection order and directed the department to grant the refund along with applicable statutory interest.
Background of the Case
The petitioner, Fateh Education Consulting Private Limited, is engaged in:
Promoting foreign universities in India
Counselling students regarding overseas education
Assisting prospective students in admission-related procedures
Providing recruitment and marketing support services to universities located outside India
The company filed a refund claim under Section 54 of the CGST Act on the basis of “Export of Services with Payment of Tax.”
The department issued a Show Cause Notice questioning whether the services provided qualified as export of services or were actually “intermediary services” under Section 2(13) of the IGST Act.
Department’s Arguments
The petitioner was identifying and recruiting students for foreign universities.
It was receiving commission linked to tuition fees.
Therefore, it was functioning as an “agent” of foreign universities.
Hence, the services were intermediary services and not export of services.
According to the department, intermediary services are not eligible for export benefits under GST.
Petitioner’s Arguments
The actual recipient of services was the foreign university situated outside India, not the students in India.
Payment for services was received directly from foreign universities.
No Principal-Agent Relationship Existed
The petitioner was independently providing marketing and consultancy services on its own account.
Issue Already Settled by Courts
The petitioner relied heavily on earlier judgments including:
Commissioner of Delhi GST v. Global Opportunities Private Limited [2025 TAXONATION 2587 (DELHI)]
K.C. Overseas Education Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India [2026 TAXONATION 3315 (BOMBAY)]
The petitioner argued that identical services had already been held to qualify as export of services.
Court's Order
The Delhi High Court held that:
The petitioner was not an intermediary under Section 2(13) of the IGST Act.
The services qualified as export of services.
The refund rejection order dated 30.10.2025 was unsustainable.
Accordingly, the Court:
Set aside the impugned order
Directed the GST department to process and grant the refund
Ordered payment of applicable statutory interest
Directed compliance within two months
GST Case Law Fateh Education Consulting Private Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner
Citation-2026 TAXONATION 989 (DELHI)
GST GPT Demo-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5HUhjcbljY&feature=youtu.be
SUBSCRIBE GST E-LIBRARY (INDIA'S HIGHEST GST CASE LAW DATA)
FOR MORE UPDATE ON GST/ IT JOIN OUR FREE WHATSAPP GROUP BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK https://chat.whatsapp.com/C8VB6F6VHme3A061UDQKhj
