Dear friends, CBDT vide circular dated 13.1.2014 (copy attached) has clarified that TDS will not be applicable on service tax if same has been charged separately in the bill. Thanks
From India, Malappuram
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
1454From India, Malappuram
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear PCA Thanks for this timely update from IT Deptt. I would be obliged, as much as many other members would be too; if you can explain the applicability along with some examples. Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Mr. Raj Kumar,
Suppose a person charges a consultancy fee of Rs. 10,000/- and gives a bill for Rs. 11,236/- (including 12.36% service tax of Rs. 1,236) to his client. The client has to deduct TDS of 10% while making payment. Now the question is on which amount he has to deduct TDS - on Rs. 10,000 or on Rs. 11,236? Logically, TDS should not be applicable on the service tax of Rs. 1,236/- since it goes to the government. Till now, the view taken by the IT Dept. was that TDS should be deducted on the full bill value (including service tax). Now, based on the decision of the Rajasthan High Court, it has been clarified that TDS is not applicable on the service tax amount charged separately in the bill. Earlier, people had to wait for a long time to get a refund due to the higher rate of TDS. Now, its effect will be that a lesser amount will be blocked in TDS. In the above example, TDS was earlier Rs. 1,123.60, which will now be reduced to Rs. 1,000/-.
Regards,
From India, Malappuram
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Suppose a person charges a consultancy fee of Rs. 10,000/- and gives a bill for Rs. 11,236/- (including 12.36% service tax of Rs. 1,236) to his client. The client has to deduct TDS of 10% while making payment. Now the question is on which amount he has to deduct TDS - on Rs. 10,000 or on Rs. 11,236? Logically, TDS should not be applicable on the service tax of Rs. 1,236/- since it goes to the government. Till now, the view taken by the IT Dept. was that TDS should be deducted on the full bill value (including service tax). Now, based on the decision of the Rajasthan High Court, it has been clarified that TDS is not applicable on the service tax amount charged separately in the bill. Earlier, people had to wait for a long time to get a refund due to the higher rate of TDS. Now, its effect will be that a lesser amount will be blocked in TDS. In the above example, TDS was earlier Rs. 1,123.60, which will now be reduced to Rs. 1,000/-.
Regards,
From India, Malappuram
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear PCA,
Thank you for the lucid and clear explanation and the illustrative example. As a member who has looked forward to such timely notifications posted by you, it has helped me, and I am sure it would be helpful to others who are not very conversant with tax matters. I would sincerely appreciate it if you include such original write-ups, wherever necessary, in your posts in the future too.
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you for the lucid and clear explanation and the illustrative example. As a member who has looked forward to such timely notifications posted by you, it has helped me, and I am sure it would be helpful to others who are not very conversant with tax matters. I would sincerely appreciate it if you include such original write-ups, wherever necessary, in your posts in the future too.
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you, PCA!
I have been seeing posts on this matter all day on various sites. However, I was not able to locate the original notification anywhere. You have saved me a lot of trouble :-)
One clarification that I would like to add here: The above notification specifically says that the agreement between the parties must mention service tax separately. So, the contracts must be reviewed to ensure the IT department does not catch on a technicality during the assessment to create problems.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I have been seeing posts on this matter all day on various sites. However, I was not able to locate the original notification anywhere. You have saved me a lot of trouble :-)
One clarification that I would like to add here: The above notification specifically says that the agreement between the parties must mention service tax separately. So, the contracts must be reviewed to ensure the IT department does not catch on a technicality during the assessment to create problems.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Appreciate the post. Some relevant information is as follows:
CBDT had issued Circular No. 4/2008 dated 28.04.2008, wherein it was clarified that tax is to be deducted at the source under Section 194-I of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the amount of rent paid/payable without including the service tax component.
Representations/letters have been received seeking clarification on whether such a principle can be extended to other provisions of the Act as well.
The Board had actually clarified in Letter F.No. 275/73/2007-IT(B), dated 30-6-2008 as follows:
Deduction of Tax at the source on Service Tax - The payments made under Section 194-I differ significantly from payments made under Section 194J in the way that in the case of 194-I, TDS has to be deducted on any income paid as rent. However, in the case of Section 194J, TDS has to be deducted on any sum paid as professional and technical fees. The Board had decided to exclude TDS on the service tax component on rental payment because it was construed that the service tax payment cannot be regarded as income of the landlord. Since Section 194J covers any sum paid, the Board has decided not to extend the scope of Circular No. 4/2008, dated April 28, 2008, to such payment under Section 194J.
In any case, the Board seems to have forgotten this letter. They are reminded of a recent judgment of the Rajasthan High Court dated 01.07.2013, in the case of CIT(TDS) Jaipur vs Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure - 2013-TIOL-663-HC-RAJ-IT, holding that if, as per the terms of the agreement between the payer and the payee, the amount of service tax is to be paid separately and was not included in the fees for professional services or technical services, no TDS is required to be made on the service tax component u/s 194J of the Act.
On re-examination of the matter, in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 119 of the Act, the Board has decided that wherever, in terms of the agreement/contract between the payer and the payee, the service tax component comprised in the amount payable to a resident is indicated separately, tax shall be deducted at the source under Chapter XVII-B of the Act on the amount paid/payable without including such a service tax component.
(CBDT Circular No. 1/2014 in F. No. 275/59/2012-IT(B), Dated: January 13, 2014).
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
CBDT had issued Circular No. 4/2008 dated 28.04.2008, wherein it was clarified that tax is to be deducted at the source under Section 194-I of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the amount of rent paid/payable without including the service tax component.
Representations/letters have been received seeking clarification on whether such a principle can be extended to other provisions of the Act as well.
The Board had actually clarified in Letter F.No. 275/73/2007-IT(B), dated 30-6-2008 as follows:
Deduction of Tax at the source on Service Tax - The payments made under Section 194-I differ significantly from payments made under Section 194J in the way that in the case of 194-I, TDS has to be deducted on any income paid as rent. However, in the case of Section 194J, TDS has to be deducted on any sum paid as professional and technical fees. The Board had decided to exclude TDS on the service tax component on rental payment because it was construed that the service tax payment cannot be regarded as income of the landlord. Since Section 194J covers any sum paid, the Board has decided not to extend the scope of Circular No. 4/2008, dated April 28, 2008, to such payment under Section 194J.
In any case, the Board seems to have forgotten this letter. They are reminded of a recent judgment of the Rajasthan High Court dated 01.07.2013, in the case of CIT(TDS) Jaipur vs Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure - 2013-TIOL-663-HC-RAJ-IT, holding that if, as per the terms of the agreement between the payer and the payee, the amount of service tax is to be paid separately and was not included in the fees for professional services or technical services, no TDS is required to be made on the service tax component u/s 194J of the Act.
On re-examination of the matter, in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 119 of the Act, the Board has decided that wherever, in terms of the agreement/contract between the payer and the payee, the service tax component comprised in the amount payable to a resident is indicated separately, tax shall be deducted at the source under Chapter XVII-B of the Act on the amount paid/payable without including such a service tax component.
(CBDT Circular No. 1/2014 in F. No. 275/59/2012-IT(B), Dated: January 13, 2014).
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear friends,
Incidentally some interesting(ed) titbits here (for laughs ?)
CESTAT has no Funds for basic requirements (Reminded of Mr.Barak Obama ?)
OUR report CESTAT Mumbai has no money to dispatch notices/letters in DDT 2272-15.01.2014 was only a tip of the proverbial iceberg. Much before the Mumbai Circular, the Chennai CESTAT had issued a notice dated 06.12.2013 to the effect that, due to acute shortage of funds and due to mandatory reduction in the budget allocation, notices for hearing, appeal memos, defect notices etc., would be sent by ordinary post and Cause List from the CESTAT website/Notice Board may be viewed for all purposes .
Enquiry by TIOL reporters has revealed that all the Benches of the CESTAT are facing similar problem of acute shortage of funds and postage is not the only casualty; they have no money to pay for telephone bills, electricity bills, hiring cars for the Members….. They are deep in debts to several agencies - Public and Private and are running the show by requesting the debtors to bear with them till the financial position improves and whenever some funds are received, they are immediately exhausted for paying outstanding bills and again they are in debts. It seems some bills pertaining to May 2013 are yet to be paid.
What will happen if the Electricity Board cuts off power, the Telephone Company disconnects the phones and the Cabs Company stops the cars for the Hon'ble Members. Will they close down the Tribunal because they can't pay the bills?
Drastic expenditure cuts are being put in place like in one Bench, they have stopped typing the orders in double space and are now doing it in single space to save paper and postage!
There is a mandatory ten percent cut in expenditure imposed by the Government in all departments. This cut is blindly extended to the Tribunal also, where it is neither practically feasible nor physically possible. The number of appeals and applications received this year are nearly more than double those received in the previous year; then how do you implement a ten percent cut in expenditure?
CESTAT need not be in such pathetic condition - after all it collects a lot of money as fees from private litigants - if the amount of fees collected is not enough to meet the expenditure, let them increase the fees, but let the Tribunal retain the fees for its expenditure.
The Government treats the CESTAT as a subordinate office of the Revenue Department and not a very important one at that - and that is the reason for this kind of poverty for the Tribunal, which deals with the richest cases in India. The Tribunal cannot be at the mercy of the Revenue Department for its funds - we should devise an alternate mechanism - there should be some financial autonomy for the Tribunal. The whole issue boils down to a couple of crores for lack of which we are facing all these problems. Advocate Gururaj of Bangalore says in our Message Board that Counsels and litigants can contribute - maybe we should ask Commissioners to contribute immediately - after all they cause all the litigation in the Tribunal.
Arrests under Service Tax
WITH the VCES ending some Service Tax wings have become active in arresting alleged evaders.
We understand that a Service Tax assessee who failed to pay the first instalment under VCES has been arrested in Mumbai for alleged Service Tax evasion of nearly three Crores rupees.
Another assessee has been arrested in Bangalore for alleged evasion of about Rs. 1.16 Crores.
No Budget in February
IT is now clear that there would be no Budget presentation on February 28 as usual. The Government is planning an extended winter session of Parliament from February 5 to 21 and the vote on account is planned on February 17. So, there would be no budget exercises and the babus in North Block can relax. Of course this does not mean the Government cannot announce sops even without a budget.
There is going to be a constitutional crisis when Parliament meets on February 5. As per Article 87 of the Constitution, at the commencement of the first session of each year, the President is supposed to address a Joint sitting of both the Houses. But the BJP Government did not follow this provision in 2004. Will the President address the First session of the year and the last session of the present LokSabha?
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Incidentally some interesting(ed) titbits here (for laughs ?)
CESTAT has no Funds for basic requirements (Reminded of Mr.Barak Obama ?)
OUR report CESTAT Mumbai has no money to dispatch notices/letters in DDT 2272-15.01.2014 was only a tip of the proverbial iceberg. Much before the Mumbai Circular, the Chennai CESTAT had issued a notice dated 06.12.2013 to the effect that, due to acute shortage of funds and due to mandatory reduction in the budget allocation, notices for hearing, appeal memos, defect notices etc., would be sent by ordinary post and Cause List from the CESTAT website/Notice Board may be viewed for all purposes .
Enquiry by TIOL reporters has revealed that all the Benches of the CESTAT are facing similar problem of acute shortage of funds and postage is not the only casualty; they have no money to pay for telephone bills, electricity bills, hiring cars for the Members….. They are deep in debts to several agencies - Public and Private and are running the show by requesting the debtors to bear with them till the financial position improves and whenever some funds are received, they are immediately exhausted for paying outstanding bills and again they are in debts. It seems some bills pertaining to May 2013 are yet to be paid.
What will happen if the Electricity Board cuts off power, the Telephone Company disconnects the phones and the Cabs Company stops the cars for the Hon'ble Members. Will they close down the Tribunal because they can't pay the bills?
Drastic expenditure cuts are being put in place like in one Bench, they have stopped typing the orders in double space and are now doing it in single space to save paper and postage!
There is a mandatory ten percent cut in expenditure imposed by the Government in all departments. This cut is blindly extended to the Tribunal also, where it is neither practically feasible nor physically possible. The number of appeals and applications received this year are nearly more than double those received in the previous year; then how do you implement a ten percent cut in expenditure?
CESTAT need not be in such pathetic condition - after all it collects a lot of money as fees from private litigants - if the amount of fees collected is not enough to meet the expenditure, let them increase the fees, but let the Tribunal retain the fees for its expenditure.
The Government treats the CESTAT as a subordinate office of the Revenue Department and not a very important one at that - and that is the reason for this kind of poverty for the Tribunal, which deals with the richest cases in India. The Tribunal cannot be at the mercy of the Revenue Department for its funds - we should devise an alternate mechanism - there should be some financial autonomy for the Tribunal. The whole issue boils down to a couple of crores for lack of which we are facing all these problems. Advocate Gururaj of Bangalore says in our Message Board that Counsels and litigants can contribute - maybe we should ask Commissioners to contribute immediately - after all they cause all the litigation in the Tribunal.
Arrests under Service Tax
WITH the VCES ending some Service Tax wings have become active in arresting alleged evaders.
We understand that a Service Tax assessee who failed to pay the first instalment under VCES has been arrested in Mumbai for alleged Service Tax evasion of nearly three Crores rupees.
Another assessee has been arrested in Bangalore for alleged evasion of about Rs. 1.16 Crores.
No Budget in February
IT is now clear that there would be no Budget presentation on February 28 as usual. The Government is planning an extended winter session of Parliament from February 5 to 21 and the vote on account is planned on February 17. So, there would be no budget exercises and the babus in North Block can relax. Of course this does not mean the Government cannot announce sops even without a budget.
There is going to be a constitutional crisis when Parliament meets on February 5. As per Article 87 of the Constitution, at the commencement of the first session of each year, the President is supposed to address a Joint sitting of both the Houses. But the BJP Government did not follow this provision in 2004. Will the President address the First session of the year and the last session of the present LokSabha?
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Friends,
If a company pays consulting fees for its services, is the individual eligible to create a salary account? This individual plays a vital role in the company on a full-time basis. Can anyone provide me with a solution for this?
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If a company pays consulting fees for its services, is the individual eligible to create a salary account? This individual plays a vital role in the company on a full-time basis. Can anyone provide me with a solution for this?
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Salary account is a facility provided by the bank to its clients, enabling people to operate bank accounts without having minimum balance or average quarterly balance limits. There is no law stating that these accounts will only be given to salaried employees. However, it is important to ensure that transfers for consultant fees are not processed in the same transaction as the salary transfer; otherwise, it may be considered as salary by PF and other government departments.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Engage with peers to discuss and resolve work and business challenges collaboratively - share and document your knowledge. Our AI-powered platform, features real-time fact-checking, peer reviews, and an extensive historical knowledge base. - Join & Be Part Of Our Community.
TDS(refunds) ON Salary & Withdrawals from EPF Acs.before 5 yrs service.docx
TDS circular.pdf