A sub contractor is essentially a taxable service provider .his services are in the nature of input services .hence service tax is leviable on taxable services provided.
Yes. A subcontractor has the responsibility to pay any taxes due on the amount he is paid for a job.
yes
Nope!
If you received the service you are liable to pay it.
80% with no tools....90% if they have all tools
There are a few debts for which you can be held responsible whether or not you signed. If you received a service and did not pay the vendor, you could be held criminally liable. If you received healthcare and were unable to sign at the time of treatment, you will be held responsible. If you agreed to pay during a telephone call and that call was recorded, you could be held liable.
In all cases except two, the provider of Service is responsible for paying the Service Tax to the Government. Only in respect of the Goods Transport Agency Service & Service received from abroad, the responsibility to pay the tax is on service receiver.
Subcontractor default insurance and bonds both provide financial protection against subcontractor defaults, but they work in different ways. Subcontractor default insurance reimburses the general contractor for costs incurred due to a subcontractor default, while bonds guarantee that the subcontractor will fulfill their obligations. Bonds require a third-party surety to pay if the subcontractor defaults, while insurance is a direct reimbursement to the general contractor.
Not likely. There is no privity of contract between the homeowner and the subcontractor. The homeowner had an agreement with the general contractor, and that's the only person they have a duty to pay. The subcontractor can only pursue payment from the general contractor - to put a lien on the home would be to punish an innocent party - the homeowner. This is between the subcontractor and the general contractor, and there's no reason to bring the homeowner into this, since the homeowner doesn't owe the subcontractor anything.
A homeowner is liable only because it is his property whether there were a hazard or not. Fear not, your homeowners Med pay and liability coverage will protect you and it will not count against you unless there was a hazard that you had the responsibility to remove or repair.
You are liable to pay for the damages on your property because of your lack of insurance.
Absolutely yes. You are ultimately liable for any damage you might have caused whether you had insurance or not. The only difference is that if you had insurance your insurance company will pay up to the policy limit for damages you might be liable for. So you can get sued for damages whether you had insurance or not.