Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2121 to 2140 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The issue pertains to the taxability of notice pay or amounts recovered by employers from employees upon premature resignation. The department contended that such recovery falls under the category of 'agreeing to an obligation to refrain from an act' u/s 66E of the Finance Act, 1994, and is thus a taxable service. However, the Tribunal held that the matter is settled by the Madras High Court's decision in GE T&D, which ruled that notice pay received by an employer from an employee for premature resignation does not constitute consideration for service rendered by either party. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order confirming the service tax demand on such notice pay recoveries, as it does not qualify as a taxable service under the law.
The issue pertains to the taxability of notice pay or amounts recovered by employers from employees upon premature resignation. The department contended that such recovery falls under the category of 'agreeing to an obligation to refrain from an act' u/s 66E of the Finance Act, 1994, and is thus a taxable service. However, the Tribunal held that the matter is settled by the Madras High Court's decision in GE T&D, which ruled that notice pay received by an employer from an employee for premature resignation does not constitute consideration for service rendered by either party. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order confirming the service tax demand on such notice pay recoveries, as it does not qualify as a taxable service under the law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
