Madras HC: No service tax on payment received from employees for Notice Period

Last updated: 08 February 2020
Quick Summary
The Madras High Court has ruled that service tax is not applicable to payments made by employees who opt to pay in lieu of serving their notice period. The court found that the employer does not provide a 'service' in such cases, but merely facilitates the employee's exit upon receiving compensation. This decision aligns with guidance notes and considers the definitions of 'service' and 'declared services' under relevant finance acts.

Court :
Madras High Court

Brief :
The Hon’ble HC, Madras in the matter of GE T & D India Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise [W.P. Nos. 35728 to 35734 of 2016 and WMP. Nos. 30704 to 30710 of 2016 dated November 7, 2019] held that service tax is not leviable on the payment received by the Petitioner in lieu of notice period paid by the outgoing employees.

Citation :
GE T & D India Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise [W.P. Nos. 35728 to 35734 of 2016 and WMP. Nos. 30704 to 30710 of 2016 dated November 7, 2019]

Daily Limit Reached

You have reached your daily limit of 2 Free Judgements

Subscribe to CCI PRO for unlimited access

Why Upgrade to CCI PRO?
  • No Ads
  • WhatsApp Broadcasts
  • Daily E-Newsletter
  • Unlimited Judgements Access
BEST VALUE
2 YEAR PLAN
3,499
(Inclusive of GST)
1 YEAR PLAN
1,999
(Inclusive of GST)
View all CCI PRO benfits

Already a PRO member? Login here for an ad-free experience.

 
Comments


Recent Judgments :

  1. Typographical Error in the SCN Cannot Be a Shield for the Assessee Who Participated in the Proceedings Without Raising Any Objection
  2. Penalty on partners under Section 122(1A) of the CGST Act upheld where complicity in fake invoicing and hawala-linked ITC fraud stands established
  3. Forest Development Tax Demand, Collection and Refund Subject to Final Outcome of Pending Cases
  4. SC : Extended Limitation Cannot Be Invoked Where Department Was Aware of Valuation Facts
  5. SC : Selling Shares While in Possession of UPSI Constitutes Insider Trading Even if No Profit Is Made
  6. SC : Laser Imagers Compatible with Machines Under Different Tariff Headings Classifiable Under CTH 9033
  7. Education Consultancy Services to Foreign Universities Not Intermediary Services; Refund of IGST on Export of Services Allowed
  8. Penalty Cannot Be Confirmed Beyond What is Specified in Statutory Form GST DRC-01
  9. Non-Supply of Field Visit Report Vitiates Rejection of Revocation Application
  10. Alternative Remedy before GSTAT to be Exhausted Despite Allegation that Adjudication Travelled Beyond SCN

View More Judgments »


Trending Online Classes

view all classess

CCI Pro
Meet our CAclubindia PRO Members
Pro Member Jaipal SinghJaipal SinghPro Member THOMAS JOHNTHOMAS JOHNPro Member Vinod DharwarkarVinod DharwarkarPro Member vinayvinayPro Member Ankur Kumar TiwariAnkur Kumar Tiwari
Subscribe to Pro
Join an elite circle of professionals

Browse by Category