9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 573X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er a service is an 'export of service' or not.
An identical issue has been considered by the Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Sunrise Immigration Consultants Private Limited [2018 (5) TMI 1417 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH] wherein the Tribunal has held that the service provided by the appellant who is providing services of referral for foreign universities is an 'export of service' not an 'intermediary service'.
Conclusion - The services provided directly to a foreign recipient, with payment in foreign exchange and meeting the conditions of Rule 6A, qualify as export services. The services do not qualify as intermediary services when the service provider acts on its own account.
Appeal allowed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n exporter of services and is not liable for the payment of service tax under the Act and Rules made thereunder because the appellant is rendering services to overseas educational universities/colleges for admission to prospective students and the consideration against the said services is received from such universities/colleges only and no payment in any manner is received from the students in India. 4.3 She further submits that the consideration with regard to educational services is directly credited into the account of the overseas universities/colleges which shows that the recipient of services of the appellant is located outside India and the benefit of such services also accrues outside India. 4.4 She also refers to Rule 6A of Ser ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le 6A ibid are fulfilled in the present case because - a) The appellant (service provider) is located in the taxable territory, Jalandhar, Punjab, India. b) The foreign universities/colleges (service recipient) are located outside India c) The service provided i.e. a marketing is not a service specify in Section 66D of the Act. d) The place of provisions of service is outside India i.e. the location of the foreign universities/colleges. e) The payment of the service has been received by the appellant in foreign exchange. f) The appellant (service provider) and the service recipient (foreign universities/colleges) are not establishment of a distinct person under item (b) of explanation 2 of clause (14) of Section 65B of the Act. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ission which is covered under Business Auxiliary Service which is not the main service provided by the main service providers namely banks/university. As the appellant did not arrange or facilitate main service i.e. education or loan rendered by colleges/banks. 11. In that circumstances, the appellant cannot be called as intermediary in the light of the judgment issued by the Advanced Ruling Authority in the case of Universal Services India Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2016 (42) STR 585 (AAR) and Godaddy India Web Services Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2016 (46) STR 806 (AAR) wherein it has been observed as under: "10. The definition of "intermediary" as envisaged under Rule 2(f) of POS does not include a person who provides the main service on his o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
