Educational Board Affiliation Services Outside Entry 66 GST Exemption: GSTAT Delhi

Council for The Indian School Eertificate Examinations Vs CGST Delhi East (GSTAT Delhi)

Summary: The appeal concerns GST liability on fees collected by the Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations (CISCE), including affiliation fees, affiliation form processing charges, annual registration charges, late registration charges, licence fees, documentation charges and late entry fees, for the period July 2017 to November 2023. The adjudicating authority treated the relevant receipts as taxable and confirmed demands under Sections 74 and 73 of the CGST Act, 2017, with interest and penalties. The first appellate authority partly modified that order: affiliation fee and affiliation form processing charges were regularised on an “as is where is” basis for 01.07.2017 to 17.06.2021, while liability on the post-18.06.2021 period was sustained; annual registration and late registration charges were sustained for the full period; documentation charges and late entry fees were treated as exempt; and the licence-fee demand was set aside on the basis of reverse charge. The Tribunal considered eight issues, including whether a consolidated SCN covering multiple tax periods was permissible, whether CISCE’s activities constituted “supply”, whether affiliation fell within Entry 66(b)(iv) of Notification No. 12/2017-CT(Rate), the treatment of annual registration charges, the effect of Circular No. 234/28/2024-GST, cum-tax valuation under Rule 35, invocation of Section 74, and consequential interest and penalties. It held that the consolidated SCN was not invalid merely because it covered multiple periods; CISCE’s activities constituted supplies and affiliation was an independent taxable supply outside Entry 66(b)(iv). Annual registration and late registration charges were also held taxable and outside the exemption. The Tribunal treated Circular No. 234/28/2024-GST as applicable to affiliation services and confined its “as is where is” regularisation to the specified period. On Rule 35, it held that the amounts collected were inclusive of GST and allowed cum-tax valuation. On Section 74, however, it found that fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression with intent to evade tax had not been established for July 2017 to August 2018, particularly having regard to the Department’s prior knowledge of the receipts and the interpretational nature of the dispute, and therefore set aside the demand for that period together with consequential interest and penalty. The final order upheld the specified post-June 2021 affiliation demand and September 2018-November 2023 registration-related demand, subject to cum-tax valuation, modified the penalty consequences, sustained the general penalty of ₹25,000 under Section 125, and directed recomputation of tax, interest and penalty in accordance with the findings.

Cases Discussed

• Technosys Integrated Solutions Pvt Ltd Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court)
• Mathur Polymers Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court)
• Bharathidasan University Vs Joint Commissioner of GST (ST-Intelligence) (Madras High Court)
• University of Mumbai Vs Union of India & Ors. (Bombay High Court)
• Goa University Vs Joint Commissioner of Central Goods And Service Tax (Bombay High Court)
• Principal Addl. DG DGGSTI v. Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences (Karnataka HIgh Court) [(2024) 22 Centax 526 (Kar.)]
• Safecon Lifescience Private Limited Vs Additional Commissioner Grade 2 And Another
• Circular No. 151/07/2021-GST dated 17.06.2021
• Circular No. 234/28/2024-GST dated 11.10.2024
• Notification No. 08/2024-Central Tax (Rate) dated 08.10.2024

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF GSTAT