Appeal allowed for export services, not intermediaries. Appellant must provide foreign remittance certificates for refund.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, determining that the appellant's services qualified as export of services and that they were not considered intermediaries under the law. The Tribunal instructed the appellant to provide the required foreign inward remittance certificates to receive the refund amount, setting aside the original authority's decision on the matter.

---

---

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are whether the appellant's services qualify as export of services, whether the appellant can be considered an intermediary under the Place of Provision of Services Rules, 2012, and whether the appellant is eligible for a refund of service tax.

Export of Services:
The appellant, engaged in guiding students seeking admissions in foreign universities, claimed that their services were export of service as they did not collect consideration from prospective students. The appellant filed a refund claim for the service tax paid, contending that their services were provided outside India. The original authority rejected the refund claim. The appellant argued that they were not providing services to Indian students but to universities abroad, making their services export of services. The Tribunal held that the appellant's services were indeed export of services, citing a similar case precedent.

Intermediary Status:
The Revenue contended that the appellant functioned as an intermediary under Rule 2(f) of the Place of Provision of Services Rules, 2012. The appellant, however, argued that they were not intermediaries as they did not receive consideration from prospective students. The Tribunal referred to a previous case where similar organizations were not considered intermediaries. The Tribunal held that the Revenue's contention that the appellant was an intermediary was not in accordance with the law.

Refund Claim:
The Revenue argued that the appellant was not eligible for a refund as they had not revised their ST-3 return for a specific period. The appellant later submitted a letter agreeing to forego a part of the refund claim. The Tribunal noted that the appellant had foregone a portion of the refund claim and reduced the refund amount accordingly. The Tribunal remanded the matter to the original authority to collect foreign inward remittance certificates for the remaining refund amount and allowed the refund upon submission of the required certificates.

Decision:
The Tribunal allowed the appeal by way of remand, holding that the appellant's services were export of services and that they were not intermediaries as per the law. The Tribunal directed the appellant to produce all necessary foreign inward remittance certificates to receive the refund amount. The impugned order was set aside for this purpose.

---