The Kerala Authority for Advance Ruling has held that student-recruitment services provided by an education consultant to foreign universities constitute intermediary services within the meaning of Section 2(13) of the IGST Act, and that the place of supply was accordingly in India (location of supplier) for the period up to 29.03.2026 under the now-omitted Section 13(8)(b), making the services taxable to GST and not qualifying as export of services. However, for the period from 30.03.2026 onwards — after the omission of Section 13(8)(b) — the place of supply is governed by Section 13(2) (location of recipient, i.e., outside India), and the services now qualify as export of services. The ruling by Members Jomy Jacob and Mansur M.I. in KER/19/2026 (M/s Global Educational Consultants, decided 21.08.2026) distinguishes the Bombay HC’s decision in KC Overseas Education and the Delhi HC’s decision in Ernst & Young on their facts.
The AAR analysed the agreement styled as ‘International Agent Agreement’ with Griffith University and found that the consultant was termed the University’s ‘Representative’ in India; was barred from collecting fees or incurring obligations without consent; was required to disclose to students that commission was paid by the University; and received commission contingent upon successful enrolment and receipt of tuition fees — not upon performance of recruitment services independently. The AAR applied CBIC Circular No. 159/15/2021-GST Illustration I and found the three-party, two-supply intermediary structure squarely satisfied. The ruling is the first detailed AAR analysis of the impact of the omission of Section 13(8)(b) on education consultants and provides a clear date-line bifurcation.
- 2026-juristway.com-2601-AAR(Kerala)-GST | AAR Kerala | KER/19/2026 | 21.08.2026