KC Overseas Education Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India and Ors (Bombay High Court)
The Bombay High Court disposed of two writ petitions raising a common issue concerning the interpretation of “export of services” under Section 2(6) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (IGST Act). The principal contention of the respondents was that sub-clause (iii) of Section 2(6), which requires the place of supply of service to be outside India, was not satisfied.
The Court held that Section 2(6) of the IGST Act must be read as a whole and not in a piecemeal manner. It emphasized that the definition of “export of services” has to be understood in the context of the statutory definition of “recipient” under Section 2(93) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, read with Section 13(2) of the IGST Act. The Court also considered these provisions alongside the definition of “intermediary” under Section 2(13) of the IGST Act.
In doing so, the Court relied on and followed the reasoning of the Delhi High Court in Ernst & Young Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner, CGST, which had examined similar statutory provisions and also took note of Circular No. 159/15/21-GST dated 20.09.2021 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs. After perusing the reasoning and conclusions in that decision, the Bombay High Court found no grounds to take a different view.
