Study Metro Edu Consultant Pvt. Ltd Vs Joint Director And Others (Madhya Pradesh High Court)
Investigation findings are not binding on GST adjudicating authority, and to be decided through proper adjudication: Madhya Pradesh High Court
The Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of M/s Study Metro Edu Consultant Pvt. Ltd. through its Authorised Signatory Abhishek Bajaj v. Joint Director and Others [Writ Petition No. 30467 of 2023, order dated August 5, 2025] held that the imprint of the Investigating Authority under Section 74(9) of the CGST Act does not bind the adjudicating authority; services rendered to foreign universities should be adjudicated independently under the proper classification and place of supply rules, and the petitioner’s writ petition is dismissed.
Facts:
M/s Study Metro Edu Consultant Pvt. Ltd., (“the Petitioner”) a company registered under Companies Act, based in Indore, providing student recruitment/student-advisory services to foreign universities via its Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) platform.
The Petitioner contended that its services rendered to foreign universities qualify as “export of services” under Section 2(6), IGST Act, 2017 and thus are not liable to GST. They had discharged GST on consideration received from students and no GST liability arises on services to the universities.
The Respondents contend that, the Petitioner acted as an intermediary agent, not rendering direct export services and that place of supply lies in India and that the findings of Investigating Authority are prima facie only and adjudication must be independent under Section 74(9). They also rely on Circular No. 31/05/2018-GST which clarifies that investigatory and adjudicatory roles are distinct, and that adjudication must be by jurisdictional Executive Officer, but can be by higher rank upon request.
