The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Delhi, has ruled that the company’s activities of promoting foreign universities among Indian students constitute export of services and are not liable to service tax in India.
The two-member bench comprising Binu Tamta (Judicial Member) and Hemambika R. Priya (Technical Member) allowed the appeal filed by the company and set aside the service tax demand of Rs. 13.45 crore confirmed by the Commissioner, CGST (East), New Delhi.
The dispute arose when the tax department alleged that TC Global India Pvt. Ltd. was acting as an “intermediary” between Indian students and foreign universities. The company was engaged in promoting overseas educational institutions and assisting students in choosing courses and applying for admissions abroad.
For these activities, the company received commission from foreign universities in convertible foreign exchange. The tax authorities, however, contended that these services were rendered within India and were therefore taxable under the Finance Act, 1994, treating them as intermediary services under Rule 2(f) of the Place of Provision of Services Rules (POPS), 2012.
Two show-cause notices covering the periods October 2015–March 2017 and April 2017–June 2017 demanded service tax of ₹13.45 crore, interest, and penalties.
The appellant argued that it was providing marketing and promotional services directly to foreign universities — not to Indian students — and hence, the services qualified as export of services under Rule 6A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994.
The appellant emphasized that all payments were received in foreign exchange. The service recipient was located outside India. The company operated independently and was not an agent of the universities. The agreements with universities explicitly stated that TC Global had no authority to admit students or act on behalf of the institutions.
The Tribunal noted that the issue was already settled in TC Global India Pvt. Ltd. v. Additional Director General, DGCEI, New Delhi (2024), where identical services were held to be exports. Referring to that precedent, the Bench reiterated that TC Global was not functioning as an “intermediary” but rather as an independent service provider.
Case Details
Case Title: TC Global India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner, CGST (East)
Case No.: Service Tax Appeal No. 55560 of 2023
Date: 17.10.2025
Counsel For Appellant: B.L. Narasimhan
Counsel For Respondent: Manoj Kumar
Read More: Demand Can’t Be Raised Based On Difference In ST-3 Returns And Form 26AS: CESTAT
