TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (8) TMI 790
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ailment and utilization of Cenvat Credit attributable to certain input services, a Show Cause cum Demand Notice dated 26.04.2016 was issued for recovery of Cenvat Credit of Service Tax amounting to Rs.2,98,842/- along with interest and proposal for imposition of penalty. In their reply to the Show Cause Notice, the Appellant stated that Cenvat Credit on motor vehicles and 'rent a cab' service was availed by them under the bona fide belief as regards admissibility of the same. But subsequently they reversed the entire credit amounting to Rs.49,417/- along with interest amounting to Rs.43,317/- payable on this score under E-Payment Challan dated 17.12.2016. But the Appellant did not agree with the contention of the Department that Cenvat Cred....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ty in this regard. In this context the appellant cited the following decisions wherein the Tribunal has allowed the credit on similar facts.:- (i) Sundaram Fasteners Ltd. Vs. CCE, Chennai [2016 (43) STR 454 (Tri.-Chennai)] (ii) Fiem Industries Ltd. Vs. CCE, Chennai-III [2016 (43) STR 470 (Tri-Chennai)] 2. The Appellant further stated that the demand raised on this score is not sustainable on merits and accordingly proposition of charging interest and imposition of penalty do not come into the picture. 3. The Appellant also contended that the demand is barred by the limitation of time since the same was not issued within the normal time frame from the date of knowledge of such alleged irregularity and the extended period as invoked i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ribunal. 6. Ld.Advocate, appearing on behalf of the Appellant submits that the fact remains that Rule 2(l)(ii)(BA) & (C) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 inter-alia excludes Life Insurance and Health Insurance from the purview of the definition of input service when such services are used primarily for personal use and consumption. But in the case of the Appellant, situation is altogether different as the key word 'Primarily' has got no applicability since it is an obligation on the part of the employer company to bring their employees under insurance coverage which is the primary object behind such policies. Therefore, as a welfare measure, it is obligatory as well as mandatorily required to bring them under insurance coverage against the pos....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....deliberate withholding of any information. Therefore, question of any willful suppression of facts does and cannot arise and extended period is not all invocable. All the factors taken together rendered the demand notice aptly barred by the limitation of time and merits to be dropped along with interest and penalty. Ld.Advocate relied upon the decision in the case of BCH Electric Ltd. Vs. CCE, Delhi-IV [2013 (31) STR 68 (Tri.Del.)]. He accordingly prayed for setting aside the impugned order. 9. The Ld.Authorized Representative for the Revenue justified the impugned orders and strongly opposed the contention put-forward by the Ld.Advocate for the Appellant with regard to credit availed after 01.04.2011. He also submitted that the Health Ins....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....k factor as well as safety of their employees through Employees Health Insurance and Group Accidental Insurance Policy and it would be an erroneous view if such coverage is treated as "primarily for consumption of employees" and thereby excluded the same from the scope and ambit of input service as provided under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. He further submits that as an employer the Appellant cannot ignore welfare of their employees. Accordingly, the employees who are not covered under ESI Scheme are well covered under the insurance policy for any untoward eventuality, therefore, it is also a moral obligation on the part of the employer to look after the welfare of the employees who are working inside or outside of the premi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re regularly submitting ER-I returns and the jurisdictional Central Excise Officers were well within their powers to call for records and examine the same. Therefore, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of Prolite Engg. v. CCE (supra), the appellant cannot be accused of suppression of the relevant information as it is not the allegation of the department that the appellant in terms of legal requirements were required to give invoice-wise and item-wise details of Cenvat credit which they have not given. Therefore, only normal limitation period would be available to the department for recovery of ineligible Cenvat credit. " 14. I also find that the Tribunal in the case of Lear Automotive India Ltd. vs. Commissi....