Supreme Court Declines To Interfere With HC Decision Treating Education Consultancy To Foreign Universities As Export

The Supreme Court recently refused to interfere with a Delhi High Court judgment that had held that educational consultancy services provided by Indian entities to foreign universities qualify as exports of services and are not taxable as intermediary services under the GST law.

A Bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma dismissed the Special Leave Petition filed by the Revenue. The Court also extended by two months the time granted to the Department to process the refund as directed by the appellate authority.

Global Opportunities Pvt. Ltd. provides education consultancy services to foreign universities. The department treated these services as intermediary services and levied GST. The company sought a refund, stating that it was providing services directly to foreign universities, which paid it in foreign currency. The appellate authority accepted this position and directed a refund with statutory interest.

The Delhi High Court declined to interfere with that order.

Before the court, the Revenue submitted that the consultancy was facilitating admissions between students in India and universities abroad. It argued that such activity fell within the definition of an intermediary under the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act and therefore could not be treated as an export of services.

The Delhi High Court held that the assessee was providing consultancy services to foreign universities on a principal-to-principal basis. It held that the foreign universities were the recipients of the services. It further held that the assessee was not merely arranging or facilitating a supply between two parties so as to fall within the definition of an intermediary.

The High Court also took note of the recommendation made at the 56th meeting of the GST Council to omit the intermediary provision from the law. It observed that while the recommendation has not yet been enacted, it supports the view that such services are consumed outside India.

While hearing the matter on January 27, 2026, the Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition.

“We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment and order of the High Court,” the Bench said.