Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2013 (12) TMI 266

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ployees. The department being of the view that this insurance service for providing group insurance/mediclaim/life insurance to the employees is not covered by the definition of input service, issued a show cause notice dated 08/01/2008 for recovery of Cenvat credit alongwith interest and imposition of penalty imposed upon them. Para 2 of the show cause notice clearly mentions that the appellant have wrongly availed Cenvat credit of Rs. 3,65,758/- on the premium paid by the company for the group insurance/mediclaim /life insurance in respect of employees as per Annexure A. Annexure A to the show cause notice also gives details only of the service tax credit taken on insurance services for employees. The show cause notice was adjudicated by ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Insurance Act, 1948, according to which the subject to the provisions of this Act, all employees in factories or establishments to which this Act applies, shall be insured in the manner provided in this set, that this provision is applicable to the appellant, that in view of this, the group insurance/mediclaim/life insurance provided by the appellant to their employees is an activity in relation to their manufacturing activity, as without providing the group insurance/life insurance/ mediclaim to the employees, they would not be allowed to carry on manufacturing operations, that for this reason only, the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CCE, Bangalore -III vs. Stanzen Toyotetsu India (P) Ltd. reported in 2011 (23) S.T.R. 444 (....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dings, pleaded that the appellant themselves have admitted that the insurance policies provided by them also covered the family members of the assessees and hence the judgments of the High Courts cited by the appellant are not applicable. 5. I have carefully considered the submissions from both the sides and perused the records. 6. The allegation against the appellant is contained in para 2 of the show cause notice dated 18/01/2008, the relevant portion of which is reproduced below :-                Whereas, during the course of audit conducted by the Head Quarter Audit wing Jaipur, it has been observed that the assessee has taken and availed wrongly Cenvat credi....