September 17, 2021
“7. We can reach the same conclusion if we consider this question from another point of view. The Act maintained services provided in the context of employment in the area of services tax. This applies not only for the period under review, but also for the time being under the new negative list system for taxation after 2012. Whether such a benefit is provided by a worker to an employer or to many persons, as in the case of common employment, cannot make any difference to the tax treatment of wages earned by the worker. We are in favour of this conclusion drawn from a draft Council circular of 27-7-2012 dealing with cases of “joint employment”. Although no final circular seems to have been published to date, we fully agree with the reasons set out in this draft circular, paragraphs 5 and 6 of which are as follows: 7.2 Furthermore, it is natural that employers` companies should have an already existing joint employment agreement and agree to effectively share the costs of employment, thus dividing them among themselves. The fact that each employer bears only its share of the costs indicates that the employers` companies do not intend to serve each other. The intention of the parties would have been for the employer undertaking which takes the trouble to hire an employee in its own roles to have insisted that an increase or margin be granted to him beyond the actual costs. In the absence of such an increase or margin, payments made by an employer undertaking against levies against other employer undertakings will not have the character of consideration for a service, but will simply represent the reimbursement of shared costs.
“Taxiguru items are very informative. You do us about by reading your blog regularly. We do not find those kinds of articles elsewhere. Continue to share these types of contributions regularly. Thank you very much. 2. In the assistant, the individual receives salary and other benefits in accordance with the policy of B Ltd. However, in order to avoid migration difficulties (under different labour laws) and to obtain the continuation of employment benefits, the entire salary of the employee in question is processed and paid by A Ltd. Costs attributable to B Ltd are recovered by A Ltd. Can the above-mentioned recovery be taxed, is the purpose of this article? 6. In this case, the complainant concluded an agreement with the group companies for the distribution of the wage costs of the employees represented in those companies. The lower division is subject to the recovery of the salary from the tax on services.
4. Entry 1 of Schedule III to the CGST Act, 2017 provides that services provided by a worker to the employer during or in the context of his or her employment are not considered to be supplies of goods or services. Can it therefore be said that a worker, when he was at B Ltd. deputation, provided placement services only for B Ltd. so that this is covered by this entry? (7) The report established in the above Decision also applies under the GST scheme. Even if the salary is paid by a single employer, in the case of an assistant, due to the conduct of the parties, the single employment contract is transformed into a joint employment contract and any reimbursement under this contract cannot be assimilated to the provision of services. The employer/employee relationship persists with the group company when the worker concerned has been posted and this delivery is covered by the entry number. . . .
© 2022 Zoe Tennesen . Creative Director | Theme by Eleven Themes