TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether CENVAT credit of service tax paid on medical and health insurance services taken for employees, and on insurance-linked services for CISF security personnel, was admissible as input service under Rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. (ii) Whether the denial of credit, interest and penalty could survive in respect of the credit already reversed for insurance of employees' dependent family members and in the light of the limitation plea.
Issue (i): Whether CENVAT credit of service tax paid on medical and health insurance services taken for employees, and on insurance-linked services for CISF security personnel, was admissible as input service under Rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.
Analysis: The definition of input service covers services used directly or indirectly in or in relation to manufacture and also specifically includes security-related services. The medical insurance of employees was connected with the manufacturing set-up and was taken in the context of statutory obligations under the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948. The exclusion for services used primarily for personal use or consumption of employees did not apply because the insurance was obtained in the name of the assessee and operated as a business-related obligation. The same rationale was applied to CISF-related insurance, since refinery security was treated as integral to the manufacturing activity and security itself falls within the inclusive part of the definition.
Conclusion: The credit on medical and health insurance services for employees and CISF security personnel was held admissible, and the impugned denial was set aside to that extent, in favour of the assessee.
Issue (ii): Whether the denial of credit, interest and penalty could survive in respect of the credit already reversed for insurance of employees' dependent family members and in the light of the limitation plea.
Analysis: The assessee had already reversed the credit relatable to insurance of dependent family members before issuance of the show cause notice. In view of that reversal and the verification noted in the adjudication order, no further penalty or interest was warranted on that component. The plea on limitation also supported interference with the penalty demand, as the department was already aware of the relevant facts and the same assessee had faced a prior notice on identical subject matter.
Conclusion: The credit already reversed for dependent family members was not reopened for relief in the assessee's favour, while the penalty and interest were not sustained to the extent they were founded on the inadmissible component.
Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only in part: credit was allowed for the admissible employee and CISF insurance component, while the reversed dependent-family component was not disturbed, with consequential relief on the disputed disallowance and penalties to the extent indicated.
Ratio Decidendi: Insurance services taken by an assessee for employees in compliance with statutory or business obligations, and security-linked insurance for compulsory refinery security arrangements, can qualify as input services unless they are shown to be primarily for personal use or consumption.
TaxTMI 
