Arranging the transport facility for the employees and recovery from employees towards such transport facility, under the terms of the employment contract, cannot be considered as supply of service in the course of furtherance of business.
Classification of service— As per the application for advance ruling filed by the applicant, they provide optional subsidized shared transport facility to their employees for to and from commutation between office and residence.
Accordingly, the following questions have been asked by the applicant, in his application before the Authority: —
i. Whether the subsidized shared transport facility provided to employees in terms of employment contract through third party vendors, would be construed as “Supply of service” by the company to its employees?
ii. If the answer to above question is in affirmative, how the value of subsidized shared transport facility provided to employees under employment contract, will be determined by the applicant?
iii. If the answer to question 1 is in affirmative, under which service classification, the activity of arranging transport facility for employees, would fall?
iv. If the answer to question 1 is in affirmative, who would be liable to pay the GST and what rate of GST would be applicable on the value of supply determined under question 2 above?
Held that— we observe that arranging the transport facility for the employees and recovery from employees towards such transport facility, under the terms of the employment contract, cannot be considered as supply of service in the course of furtherance of business. Providing transport facility to employees is no where connected with the business of the applicant.
Accordingly, we are in unison with the applicant that arranging the transport facility for the employees is definitely not an activity which is incidental or ancillary to the activity of software development, nor can it be called an activity done in the course of or in furtherance of development of software as it is not integrally connected to the business in such a way that without this the business will not function.
As we are of the view that arranging transport facility to its employee is not a supply of service, accordingly the remaining questions become redundant and merit no discussion.
Arranging the transport facility for the employees and recovery from employees towards such transport facility, under the terms of the employment contract, cannot be considered as supply of service in the course of furtherance of business.
Classification of service— As per the application for advance ruling filed by the applicant, they provide optional subsidized shared transport facility to their employees for to and from commutation between office and residence.
Accordingly, the following questions have been asked by the applicant, in his application before the Authority: —
i. Whether the subsidized shared transport facility provided to employees in terms of employment contract through third party vendors, would be construed as “Supply of service” by the company to its employees?
ii. If the answer to above question is in affirmative, how the value of subsidized shared transport facility provided to employees under employment contract, will be determined by the applicant?
iii. If the answer to question 1 is in affirmative, under which service classification, the activity of arranging transport facility for employees, would fall?
iv. If the answer to question 1 is in affirmative, who would be liable to pay the GST and what rate of GST would be applicable on the value of supply determined under question 2 above?
Held that— we observe that arranging the transport facility for the employees and recovery from employees towards such transport facility, under the terms of the employment contract, cannot be considered as supply of service in the course of furtherance of business. Providing transport facility to employees is no where connected with the business of the applicant.
Accordingly, we are in unison with the applicant that arranging the transport facility for the employees is definitely not an activity which is incidental or ancillary to the activity of software development, nor can it be called an activity done in the course of or in furtherance of development of software as it is not integrally connected to the business in such a way that without this the business will not function.
As we are of the view that arranging transport facility to its employee is not a supply of service, accordingly the remaining questions become redundant and merit no discussion.