Charitable society denied GST exemption for not directly providing medical education

The appellant, a charitable society engaged in medical education, was found not to qualify as an "Educational Institution" under GST law. Since the society does not directly provide medical education, it was deemed not liable for GST registration. Questions regarding fees, charges, and exemptions were considered irrelevant as they related to a separate entity, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal and upholding of the original ruling.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the appellant, a charitable society engaged in imparting medical education, qualifies as an "Educational Institution" under GST law.
2. Whether the appellant is liable for GST registration under Section 22 or exempt under Section 23 of the GST Act.
3. Whether fees and charges received from students and patients constitute "outward supply" under GST.
4. Classification of charges for medicines and diagnostics under "composite supply" and their exemption status.
5. Exemption status of nominal charges for health insurance and support activities under GST.

Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Qualification as an "Educational Institution":
The Appellate Authority examined whether the appellant, Kasturba Health Society (KHS), and Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences (MGIMS) are separate entities. It was found that MGIMS is a joint venture involving the Central Government, State Government, and the appellant society. The Governing Council, which includes members from the government, regulates MGIMS. Therefore, KHS and MGIMS are separate entities. The appellant society does not directly provide medical education; hence, it does not qualify as an "Educational Institution" under GST law.

2. Liability for GST Registration:
Since the appellant society does not provide medical education directly, the question of its liability for GST registration under Section 22 or exemption under Section 23 was deemed irrelevant. The appellant society's activities do not constitute taxable supplies, and thus, the question was not answered.

3. Fees and Charges as "Outward Supply":
The fees and charges received from students and patients are related to MGIMS, not the appellant society. As MGIMS is a separate entity, the appellant's question regarding these fees constituting "outward supply" under GST was not maintainable.

4. Classification of Charges for Medicines and Diagnostics:
The appellant's query about whether the cost of medicines and diagnostics qualifies as "composite supply" and its exemption status was not answered. The reason being that these transactions pertain to MGIMS, not the appellant society, making the question non-maintainable under Clause (a) of Section 95 of the CGST Act.

5. Exemption Status of Nominal Charges for Health Insurance and Support Activities:
Similarly, the questions regarding nominal charges for health insurance and support activities (such as banking, parking, refreshment) were not answered. These transactions are related to MGIMS and not the appellant society, rendering the questions non-maintainable under Clause (a) of Section 95 of the CGST Act.

Conclusion:
The Appellate Authority upheld that MGIMS and KHS are separate entities. The appellant society does not qualify as an "Educational Institution" under GST law and is not liable for GST registration based on its activities. Questions related to fees, charges, and exemptions were not maintainable as they pertain to MGIMS, not the appellant society. The appeal was dismissed, and the original order by the Advance Ruling Authority was upheld.

---