Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  The GSTN has issued an Advisory dated 21.04.2026 about the introduction of an Offline Tool for the Invoice Management System (IMS)  *  CBIC extends due dates for filing of FORM GSTR 3B  for the month of April 2026 *  Interest cannot be imposed in adjudication order, if not demanded/quantified in show cause notice : Allahabad HC *  Wheelchairs with toileting facility eligible for exemption: CESTAT affirms customs duty exemption to importer *  Industries urge GST council to allow inverted duty refunds on input services *  Tamil Nadu GST dept introduced virtual hearing facility for GST appeals under under section 107 of the TNGST act: detailed guidelines  *  CIC urges authorities to implement GST evasion complaint tracking system *  Even if the assessee opts "NO" for personal hearing in form DRC-06 ,The mandatory requirement under section 75(4) to grant opportunity of hearing cannot be waived:Gujarat High Court  *  Glufosinate imports curbs imposed by govt *  Government extends Re-import period for exported cut & polished diamonds *  CIC flags lack of tracking system for tax evasion complaints,urges GST authorities to improve transparency *  No Custodial Interrogation needed in GST fraud case based on documentary evidence already in Department's Possession : Chattisgarh HC *  Orders under section cannot be sustained if passed without considering the taxpayer's objections and without granting a personal hearing:Gujarat High Court *  Mere cancellation of supplier's registration cannot,by itself,justify denial of ITC or cancellation of the recipient's registration:Bombay High Court *  High Court sets aside GST notice citing factual errors and natural justice violations *  Provisional Bank Attachment under Section. 110 of Customs Act Unsustainable Beyond Statutory period without Extension order: Bombay HC orders to defreeze accounts *  Post Clearance MRP Alteration by Distributor Does not attract Differential Customs Duty: CESTAT *  DGFT Expands scope of 'Screws' classification under RoDTEP Scheme  *  E-way bills surze to all time high of 140.6 million in March *  GST Exemption Allowed on Pure Labour Services for Standalone Houses: AAR  *  GST Payable Only on Margin in Second-Hand Car Sales, Subject to Strict Conditions and No ITC Claim: AAR *  DGFT rolls out procedure for allocation of calcined coke *  GST portal update : Pre-deposit amount now editable in Appeals *  J&K HC declared TMT scrap a 'Specified Good' eligibile for GST refunds under Support Scheme  *  Pigmy agents are employees of banks; no GST can be levied on commission  paid to them : Karnataka HC *  DGFT Revises HS Code Description for Screws Under RoDTEP *  GST Registration Cancellation Invalid Without Proper Service of Notice: Allahabad High Court. *  Bengaluru CGST | GST Backlog Appeals Deadline Fixed at June 30, 2026 *  No Time Bar on Refund of Service Tax for Services Not Rendered: CESTAT  Remands Indiabulls Case for Unjust Enrichment Check. *  Supreme Court Holds Renewable Energy Incentive Must Benefit Generators, Not Be Adjusted in Tariff
Subject News *   Delhi HC Quashes Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Improperly Served GST SCN *  KARNATAKA HIGH COURT REMANDS GST SHORTFALL MATTER DUE TO ABSENCE OF PERSONAL HEARING   *  CESTAT cancels confiscation and penalties on imported computer cabinet cases: Custom duty restricted to 111 surplus units *  Deposit of tax during search or investigation cannot be treated as 'Voluntary Payment' : Bombay High Court *  Section 76 of the CGST cannot be invoked where the tax has already been duly deposited, even if through another registration of the same entity: Madras High Court *  Sec 74 allows use of material regardless of source; illegality or flaws in section 67 search do not vitiate valid adjudication: HC *  Inter-State transfer of ITC on Amalgamation permissible as given under section 18(3) read with rule 41 of the CGST rules, 2017: Gujarat High Court *  HC: No GST on commisson paid to Pigmy Agents *  IGST refund denial on illegible bill of lading invalid absent chance to furnish docs; merit reconsideration in appeals directed: HC *  ITC is not admissible on GST paid on leasehold rights of land used fpr setting up an air seperation plant: AAAR,Tamil Nadu *  GST: No penalty under Section 74 after voluntary ITC reversal due to non-existent supplier : High Court *  TN AAAR denies GST ITC on Land Lease under Sec. 17(5)(d) for setting up plant and machinery *  GST proceedings quashed as notices sent to old address, despite updated address in registration *  Importer Can’t Be Penalised for Alleged IGCR Procedural Lapses Without Evidence of Departmental Error: CESTAT *  Structured Healthcare Training Not ‘Charitable Activity’, 18% GST Payable: AAR  *  CESTAT As The Appellate Authority For Central Sales Tax Disputes: A Paradigm Shift Under Finance Act, 2023 *   Rs. 25K Cost Imposed On SGST Joint Commissioner for Attaching Bank  Accounts Without Forming Mandatory “Opinion”: Bombay HC *   Ex-Parte GST Order Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice: Karnataka  High Court Quashes Adjudication and Bank Attachment.  *   Retrospective GST Cancellation Can’t Invalidate Genuine Transactions:  Jaipur Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Rs. 95,670 ITC Demand. *   GST Pre-Deposit Non-Compliance: Allahabad High Court Allows Appeal  Subject to Rs. 30 Lakh Balance Deposit, Recognises Offline Filing. *  Documentary Nature of Evidence: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Rs. 32.66 Crore Fake ITC Fraud Case *  Supreme Court Flags Systemic Bias in Army’s Permanent Commission Process for Women Officers *  Re-Determination of Land Compensation Can Be Based on Appellate Court Awards, Clarifies Scope of S. 28-A: Supreme Court. *  Supreme Court Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Costs On Rent Authority Officer For Acting Beyond Jurisdiction. *  DGGI Meerut | Court Denies Bail to Accused in Claiming Fake ITC And Export Refunds *  Denial of GST Rate Revision Benefit to Contractor Violates Article 14: Rajasthan HC *  GST Registration Cancellation for Non-Filing of Returns: Gauhati High Court Directs Restoration on Compliance. *   Supreme Court Quashes FEMA Adjudication Orders, Revives Proceedings at  Show Cause Stage. *   Higher Rank, Harsher Punishment Justified: Supreme Court Restores Dismissal  of Bank Manager in Misappropriation Case. *   Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation,  Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT  

Comments

Publish Date: 24 Jul, 2014
Print   |    |  Comment

Reverse charge on director’s service: an expansion adding confusion

Reverse charge on director’s service: an expansion adding confusion
 

An article by:-
CA. Pradeep Jain
CA. Preeti Parihar
Kushal Shah
 

Preface:-
The people of India have desperately voted Modi Government for change. The verdict of this budget represented the exasperation with the status scope. The journey of complications for the applicability of tax provisions under reverse charge mechanism under “the services provided by the director to the company” is expanded widely by introducing a new word “body corporate” is explained herein.
 
Backdrop:-
First introduction of the reverse charge mechanism on the services provided by directors to the company was by Notification No.45/2012-Service Tax dated 6.8.2012. This notification amended the notification no. 30/2012-ST dated 20.6.2012 which prescribed the services falling under Reverse charge. By amending this basic notification, the services of director were brought under full reverse charge by adding the following clause:-
 “(iva)   provided or agreed to be provided  by a director of a company to the said company;”;
 
Also, the table given in the said notification was amended to insert serial no. 5A which prescribed that 100% service tax shall be payable by the company for the services provided or to be provided by the director.
 
Thus, by virtue of this amendment, full reverse charge was applicable if the following two conditions were satisfied:-
·        The services are being provided by a DIRECTOR.
·        The services are being provided to a COMPANY.
 
 
Recent Amendment vide Budget, 2014:-
Notification no. 10/2014-ST dated 11.7.2014 has been issued to amend further the clause related to services provided by director of a company to the said company. The above referred clause (iva) of the notification no. 30/2012-ST has been substituted as follows:-
“(iva) provided or agreed to be provided by a director of a company or a body corporate to the said company or the body corporate;”;
Thus, now, the reverse charge is also applicable if the services are being provided by a DIRECTOR to the BODY CORPORATE. Earlier only services provided by the director to the company were covered.
 
Implication of amendment:-
The recent amendment has made the reverse charge applicable on the services provided by a DIRECTOR to a BODY CORPORATE. Section 65(1) of the Finance Act defines the term body corporate as follows:-
“body corporate” shall have the meaning assigned to it in clause (7) of section 2 of the Companies Act,1956 (1 of 1956);.”
 
The definition of body corporate as per clause (7) of section 2 of the Companies Act, 1956 is as under:-
“ (7) "body corporate" or "corporation" includes a company incorporated outside India but does not include -
(a) a corporation sole ;
(b) a co-operative society registered under any law relating to co-operative societies ; and
(c) any other body corporate (not being a company as defined in this Act), which the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify in this behalf ;”
It is worth noting here that the Companies Act, 1956 has been substituted vide Companies Act, 2013. As per Section 2 of The Companies Act, 2013, the definition of body corporate is a under:-
“(11) “body corporate” or “corporation” includes a company incorporated outside
India, but does not include—
(i) a co-operative society registered under any law relating to co-operative societies; and
(ii) any other body corporate (not being a company as defined in this Act),which the Central Government may, by notification, specify in this behalf;”
Thus, the definition of body corporate given in Companies Act is very wide and only co-operative society and notified bodies are not included in this definition. Therefore, all the other legal entities will get covered in the definition of body corporate, accordingly, the scope of Reverse charge has been increased drastically. Many such legal entities which do not fall in the definition of company but are very well covered in the definition of “body corporate” will come under service tax net if they avail the services of director. It is worth noting here that the term ‘director’ is not defined in Finance Act or in the notification no. 30/2012-ST. Therefore, general meaning shall have to be taken. In normal parlance, director means a person who is in charge of an activity, department, or organization or a member of the board of people that manages or oversees the affairs of a business. The synonyms used for the term director are administrator, manager, chairman, chairwoman, chairperson, chair, head, chief, boss, etc.
Since the term body corporate is very widely defined and the meaning of director is not given anywhere in the service tax law, its general meaning shall have to be taken. Also, it is nowhere specified that the definition of “director” will be borrowed from Companies Act. Even if we look into the definition of director under Companies Act, it reads as follows:-
 
“(34) “director” means a director appointed to the Board of a company.”
 
Thus, director means the director appointed to the Board of the company and the board is defined as follows:-
(10) “Board of Directors” or “Board”, in relation to a company, means the collective body of the directors of the company;
The cumulative analysis of these two definitions makes it clear that the term director used in the Companies Act is restricted to the “directors” of a “company”.
 
Since now the reverse charge has been made applicable to the “body corporate” too, in our view, the definition of “director” as given in the Companies Act does not apply here. Also, the term “body corporate” is wider as it covers company incorporated outside India too. Thus, in view of this fact and due to the fact that the definition of “director” is not given in the Service tax law; it is more feasible to take its general meaning. Due to this, in our view, including the services provided by directors to the body corporate under Reverse charge has drastically increased the scope of Reverse charge.
 
 
Good Bye words:-
 
Tax Research Unit (TRU) has released letter no. D.O.F. No. 334/15/2014-TRU dated 10.7.2014 wherein it has been clarified at para 4.1.2 as follows:-
 
Service provided by a Director to a body corporate is being brought under the reverse charge mechanism; service receiver, who is a body corporate will be the person liable to pay service tax. This is in view of requests by body corporates such as the Reserve Bank of India.

Thus, the said amendment has been made in view of requests by big body corporates.  However, unaware of the fact that the definition of body corporate is very wide and the term director is also not defined in the Service tax law; it is most likely that this is going to be a burning issue of future as the department will be liberal enough in interpreting the definition of “body corporate” which will bring a number of big and small assessees under service tax net which does not seem to be intention of government. We hope that the government issues a clarification soon on the interpretation of the term body corporate and inclusions therein alongwith the meaning of term “director” to be taken for the purpose reverse charge mechanism.
 

Comments

Post a Comment



Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com