In re Allen Career Institute Private Limited (GST AAR Rajasthan)
Summary: The Rajasthan Authority for Advance Ruling (Goods and Services Tax), in Advance Ruling No. RAJ/AAR/2026-27/11 dated 30 July 2026, considered an application by M/s ALLEN CAREER INSTITUTE PRIVATE LIMITED concerning the applicability of Notification No. 13/2020-Central Tax dated 21 March 2020, as amended, and the requirement to issue e-invoices for coaching services where parents, guardians or sponsoring business enterprises pay the consideration and may furnish a GSTIN. The applicant provides commercial coaching services for competitive examinations including IIT-JEE and NEET through physical centres and digital/online modes and proposed additional batches of courses. The applicant contended that under Section 2(93)(a) of the CGST Act, the person liable to pay consideration is the recipient and that, where a parent, guardian or business enterprise furnishes a valid GSTIN, e-invoicing under Rule 48(4) of the CGST Rules read with Notification No. 13/2020-Central Tax is mandatory. It also submitted that the supplier was not required to investigate the recipient’s business purpose or eligibility for input tax credit (ITC). The jurisdictional officer disputed the premise that the fee-paying person is necessarily the recipient, contending that the coaching service is rendered to and consumed by the student, and also raised maintainability objections under Sections 95(a), 97(2) and 98(2).
The Authority found the application maintainable because the applicant was an existing supplier and the arrangement concerned proposed supplies, while noting that the ruling must remain confined to the pleaded facts. It held that Query 1 could be answered only regarding applicability of the notification and that no finding could be given on the identity of the recipient or place of supply, since place of supply is outside Section 97(2). Under Section 31(2), Rule 46 and Rule 48(4) of the CGST Rules, read with Notification No. 13/2020-Central Tax, as amended by Notification No. 10/2023-Central Tax dated 10 May 2023, a registered person exceeding the prescribed ₹5 crore turnover threshold is required to generate e-invoices for supplies made to registered persons or exports, subject to the stated exclusions. The Authority observed that merely furnishing a GSTIN or making payment does not, by itself, establish that a person is the recipient. Where the contract of supply makes the parent, guardian or business enterprise legally liable to pay the fee, that person may fall within Section 2(93)(a); otherwise, the mere payment or furnishing of a GSTIN is insufficient. Whether the person furnishing the GSTIN is actually liable to pay under the contract is a question of fact dependent on enrolment documents, terms and conditions and other transaction material. The Authority also held that supplier-side e-invoicing compliance operates independently of the recipient’s ITC eligibility under Sections 16 and 17, with the burden of proving ITC eligibility lying on the claimant under Section 155. However, the ruling does not validate any particular B2B supply or establish entitlement to ITC and records no finding on Section 17(5)(g). The ruling is confined to the pleaded facts, ceases to bind if the supporting law, facts or circumstances change under Section 103(2), and remains without prejudice to examination of individual transactions by the proper officer. The ruling on both queries was accordingly stated to be in terms of the Authority’s discussions and findings at paragraphs 6–9 and 10–11.
Cases Discussed
* Rajes Rama Varma [2020 (42) G.S.T.L. 278 (App. A.A.R. – GST – T.N.) dated 18 August 2020]
* J.C. Overseas Education Pvt. Ltd. [(2025) 34 Centax 222 (S.C.)/2025 (102) G.S.T.L. 195 (S.C.) dated 25 August 2025]
* Verizon Communication India Pvt. Ltd. [2018 (8) G.S.T.L. 32 (Del.) dated 12 September 2017]
