TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal upholds CENVAT credit on 'Workmen Compensation Insurance Policy services'</h1> <h3>COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NAGPUR Versus M/s UNI-DERINTED LTD</h3> COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NAGPUR Versus M/s UNI-DERINTED LTD - TMI Issues:- Appeal against Order-in-Appeal allowing CENVAT credit on 'Workmen Compensation Insurance Policy services'- Interpretation of scope of input services under Service Tax law- Admissibility of new issue not raised in show-cause noticeAnalysis:The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai involved a challenge by the Revenue against an Order-in-Appeal allowing CENVAT credit on 'Workmen Compensation Insurance Policy services.' The Commissioner (Appeals) had relied on previous Tribunal decisions and the expansive definition of input services to grant the benefit to the assessee. The Revenue contended that the Service Tax paid on the services in question was not shown to be part of the assessable value of final products. However, the respondent argued that this issue was not raised earlier and thus should not be considered at this stage.Regarding the interpretation of input services, the Tribunal referred to the case law and held that the definition is inclusive and not exhaustive, with a broad scope. The Tribunal noted that in a previous case, the credit on Group Insurance Health Policy was allowed as an input service. It was emphasized that the department had not previously raised the question of whether the Service Tax on the Workmen Compensation Insurance Policy was included in the assessable value. Therefore, bringing up this new issue at this stage was deemed inappropriate.Consequently, the Tribunal found no justification to interfere with the lower appellate authority's findings and dismissed the department's appeal as lacking merit. The judgment highlighted the importance of consistency in raising issues throughout the proceedings and affirmed the broad interpretation of input services under the Service Tax law. The decision was pronounced in court, upholding the Order-in-Appeal allowing the CENVAT credit on the disputed services.
TaxTMI 