The legal issue in the worker`s detachment is the determination of the tax debt. In other words, if the reimbursement of wages is taxable in their country of origin or in the country where the workers are posted. This is one of the most controversial areas, as the legal argument in this regard depends mainly on the nature of the work and the degree of control of seconded workers. According to Klaus Vogel and commentary, the relationship between the employer and the employer is controlled and controlled by the employer. A brief provision of a secondment agreement explicitly specifying which party is responsible for withholding tax and remittances (responsibility should be entrusted to the party that actually pays the employee`s salary) can potentially avoid trouble with the rating agency or with a contractor on these matters. The review of the next part of the article is based on a fundamental caveat that the applicability of any proposal depends on the facts of the case, the terms of the secondment agreement and the provisions of the Double Taxation Prevention Agreement (DBAA). This argument was explicitly rejected by apex Court in the case [TS-5020-SC-2007-O] and by the Delhi Supreme Court in the case [TS-237-HC-2014 (DEL)-O]. This is mainly due to the fact that workers are entitled to the social benefits of the foreign company and that the worker must return to the original company at the end of the secondment. Thus, these MPs have a right to pledge their employment in foreign society.

In addition, Regulation 100, paragraph 4, provides that if a worker is not required to register for work at an employer`s establishment, he or she is considered to be declared at work (in terms of salary, salary or commissions) at the establishment of the employer who pays the compensation11. that the worker shows up at the establishment of the employer who is presenting himself. In this context, Dharan V.