Compromise-and-arrangement extensions may accommodate debt assignment where creditor commercial judgment supports value maximisation and avoids proced...
Delayed-payment surcharge is not taxable tolerance consideration where it penalises default, while meter testing follows electricity distribution trea...
Sufficient cause for delayed revenue income-tax appeals requires bona fides, due diligence and a credible explanation; otherwise limitation bars appea...
Inverted-duty-structure refunds remain available for unchanged-rate apparel supplies despite trader status and require tax-period-specific computation...
Foundational assessment satisfaction is essential before initiating penalty for cash receipt of immovable-property sale consideration under section 27...
GST cannot be collected on a penalty imposed on an employee for...
Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationships.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
GST cannot be collected on a penalty imposed on an employee for stock shortage merely because an employment relationship exists. Paragraph 5(e) of Schedule II to the CGST Act applies to agreements connected with a supply of services. A stock-shortage penalty arising from the employer-employee relationship is not, without more, consideration for a supply of services. Accordingly, that provision does not authorise GST on such recovery. The de novo enquiry concerning the collection was sustained, while the intra-court appeal was dismissed.
GST cannot be collected on a penalty imposed on an employee for stock shortage merely because an employment relationship exists. Paragraph 5(e) of Schedule II to the CGST Act applies to agreements connected with a supply of services. A stock-shortage penalty arising from the employer-employee relationship is not, without more, consideration for a supply of services. Accordingly, that provision does not authorise GST on such recovery. The de novo enquiry concerning the collection was sustained, while the intra-court appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.