As per the section 7(2) of CGST Act, 2017 i.e schedule 3 in which the list specified is neither to be treated as supply of goods nor supply of services, in which it is stated that service provided by an employee to the employer in the course of or in relation to hiss employment not to be treated as supply of good or supply of services.
In para 5(e) of schedule 2 of Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 that “Agreeing to the obligation to refrain from an act or to tolerate an act or a situation, or to do an act” has been specifically declared to be a supply of service, if the same thing is constitute as “supply” within the Act.
For the supply, there must be one of the most essential elements to be there in the transaction, except the list specified in schedule 1, i.e, Consideration.
Circular No. 178/10/2022-GST specifically mentioned that the amounts recovered by the employer were not as consideration for tolerating the act of such premature quitting of employment but as penalties, and, therefore, the employer was not liable to pay GST on notice pay.
Also, you can refer MANAPPURAM FINANCE LTD. Versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX AND EXCISE, THRISSUR - 2022 (12) TMI 411 - KERALA HIGH COURT, Kerala High Court order.
By referring to the circular and case law mentioned above, we can say that whatever amount that has been recovered from the employee as Notice pay is to discourage non-serious employees from taking up employment. As they are not leaving the entity without the specific notice period that has been mentioned in the employment agreement, then for such breach of the contract the amount will be deducted for such period they have not given the notice as per the policy term, and remaining amount will be refund back to the employee.
As in such case whatever amount is collected is not for the tolerating the act as after collecting the amount employee get nothing in the back so it will not considered as consideration and the transaction will not constitute in supply so there will be no levy of GST.