Guru .. I completely agree with Tajsateesh and sawatabanerjee on their submissions.. an employment contract cannot come under service tax, even at the FnF level since there is no "service" rendered or accepted. Remember the overheads and HR costs you seem to be referred to are operational costs and not services ascribable to employment.
I also second my friends' requests to you to share the relevant sections to your reference "['............inform you that in July 2012, there was some amendment in Service Tax rules..']
With regard to Loginmiraclelogistics remarks; I personally found your comments rather unnecessary, abrasive and quite offensive. Even in highly serious board rooms, there is room for humor. I tried looking up the rules on CiteHR and couldn't find a rule that debars any of us from smiling when on this forum.
From India, Mumbai
139I also second my friends' requests to you to share the relevant sections to your reference "['............inform you that in July 2012, there was some amendment in Service Tax rules..']
With regard to Loginmiraclelogistics remarks; I personally found your comments rather unnecessary, abrasive and quite offensive. Even in highly serious board rooms, there is room for humor. I tried looking up the rules on CiteHR and couldn't find a rule that debars any of us from smiling when on this forum.
From India, Mumbai
Dear friends,
Thanks for these rejoinders from all of you.
It appears there has been misconception in understanding the concept of ST as the provisions of taxation on services becomes more and more complex and seen as a domain having potential area for filling up the coffers of the exchequer. As a person practicing in ST matters and also HR functions I only can view that some unscrupulous employers trying to unnecessarily recover non-existent tax from the helpless employees. This is evident from the queries raised by some of our friends. First of all one should understand that a relationship exists between an "Employer" and his "Employee" does not come under the ambit of "Services" either during employment or anything related to such employment "thereafter". A settlement accrued & due and settled subsequent to relinquishing the employment can never come under the "services" warranting recovery of ST from such (ex)employee. Some extra cautious administrators & accountants could have inflicted such avoidable arguments and recovery. This has to be negatived by the concerned at any cost in order to stop continuance of such wrongful recoveries.
In order to provide some tips to the needy I attach a notes of ST, negative list etc. for their ready reference.
Of course, there are innumerable notifications issued on ST and settled cases which only could clarify certain specific issues, those are available in the respective websites.
Thank U.
From India, Bangalore
Thanks for these rejoinders from all of you.
It appears there has been misconception in understanding the concept of ST as the provisions of taxation on services becomes more and more complex and seen as a domain having potential area for filling up the coffers of the exchequer. As a person practicing in ST matters and also HR functions I only can view that some unscrupulous employers trying to unnecessarily recover non-existent tax from the helpless employees. This is evident from the queries raised by some of our friends. First of all one should understand that a relationship exists between an "Employer" and his "Employee" does not come under the ambit of "Services" either during employment or anything related to such employment "thereafter". A settlement accrued & due and settled subsequent to relinquishing the employment can never come under the "services" warranting recovery of ST from such (ex)employee. Some extra cautious administrators & accountants could have inflicted such avoidable arguments and recovery. This has to be negatived by the concerned at any cost in order to stop continuance of such wrongful recoveries.
In order to provide some tips to the needy I attach a notes of ST, negative list etc. for their ready reference.
Of course, there are innumerable notifications issued on ST and settled cases which only could clarify certain specific issues, those are available in the respective websites.
Thank U.
From India, Bangalore
Dear friends, For those who are in need of some more on ST matters,use the attached information. Regards,
From India, Bangalore
From India, Bangalore
Notice period shortfall is treated as a short of service and will have to be completed by someone else whom we would pay a fee. this fee attracts service tax. since the service tax follows the list of exclusions. this is my interpretation.
From India, Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Dear Anonymous - if an employee's work is completed by a contractor (a fee that attracts service tax) - it is a business decision YOU are taking and not the employee leaving. If it is completed by another employee, there is no service tax involved. Liabilities related to your business decisions are your's alone and can not be linked to the terminations of another contract. This, to me, is nothing but unethical ways to gain a few thousand rupees of positive cash flow through incredibly creative accounting.
From India, Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Go to the link in above post. See the link in reply in that forum. Notification is attached.
From India, Bangalore
From India, Bangalore
The link has a note posted by someone saying that this is now liable to service tax but there is no notification attached to the discussion
From India, Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
If you read the reply in reply one link. Go to that linked discussion, you can see the attached document in blue color.
From India, Bangalore
From India, Bangalore
Find answers from people who have previously dealt with business and work issues similar to yours - Please Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query.
Service Tax.pdf