TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (12) TMI 181
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by the Commissioner of Large Taxpayers' Unit, Bangalore. Appeal No. OIO No. Period Duty Penalty C/25904/2013 No.158/2012-ST Commr.) dt. 20.12.2012 2009-2010 Rs.86,88,46,162/- Rs.86,88,46,162/- C/25904/2013 No.158/2012-ST Commr.) dt. 20.12.2012 2008-2009 Rs.76,82,48,992/- Rs.76,82,48,992/- C/25909/2013 No.160/2012-ST (Commr.) dt. 20.12.2012 2010-2011 Rs.67,52,15,847/- Rs.67,52,15,847/- 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in providing taxable services under the category of Life Insurance Service and Management of Investment under Unit Link Insurance Plan (ULIP) as defined under Section 65(105)(zx) and Section 65(105)(zzzf), respectively of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tted that it provides an option to pay an amount calculated at the rate of 1% of the gross amount of premium by insurer towards discharge of the tax liability. The Appellant has been paying the tax accordingly. He submits that the definition of 'exempted service' was brought into effect with effect from 01.04.2011 and the Circular dated 12.07.2011 issued clarifying that other services related to investments/servicing were not chargeable to Service Tax prior to 01.04.2011. Accordingly, these services were clarified to be exempt from payment of service tax. Consequently, show-cause notices were issued to the appellant under Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 on the value of the exempted service. 4. He has submitted that the definition....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company Limited 5. He has further submitted that the Learned Commissioner while confirming the demand has placed reliance on the Circular dated 12.07.2011 observing that saving component in life insurance service was not a taxable service during the period, hence, the same is an exempted service. He has submitted that the amended definition also provides for levy of service tax under the category of Life Insurance service, hence, there is no other service, which was rendered by the appellant; therefore, this service cannot be considered as an exempt service. The said Circular was considered by the Tribunal in M/s. HDFC Life Insurance Company and M/s. Birla Life Insurance Company Ltd.: 2020-10-TMI-578. A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dit Rules, 2004 with effect from 01.04.2016, proportionate reversal of CENVAT credit was allowed, retrospectively with effect from 01.04.2008. Further, he has submitted that Tribunal in a series of cases observed that such amendment is retrospective in effect and would apply for the past period also. i) Reliance Industries Limited reported in 2019 (28) G.S.T.L. 96 (CESTST Ahmedabad) ii) Dell International Services India Pvt. Ltd. Reported in 2020 (7) TMI 264 (CESTAT, Bangalore). iii) Molex India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Tax, Reported in 2019-TIOL-3205 (CESTAT, Bangalore). iv) E-connect Solutions Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2020 (11) TMI 282 (CESTAT New Delhi). v) Sify Technologies Ltd V/s ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt appeal for determination is: whether the services provided by the appellant viz., Life Insurance Service and Management of Investment under ULIP Plan services for which the premium collected and a portion of the same is attributable to risk coverage component falls within the definition of taxable service and savings investment component of the premium collected does not fall under the definition of taxable service, hence exempted service; accordingly the CENVAT credit availed on input services be considered as used in providing also exempted services, hence provisions of Rule 6(3)(i) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 is attracted, in absence of maintenance of separate records for exempted and taxable services. 12. The learned advocate for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gory of "Management of Investment Service". Admittedly, substantial portion of the premium is Invested in various financial Instruments. The revenue holds that that portion of Invested amount should be treated as value of exempted services. The Id. AR referred to Rule 2(e) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 to state that exempted service shall Include service on which no tax is payable. We note that in the present arrangement the appellant assessee is providing Service of ULIP for the insured. For such service, the tax is paid. There is no separate identifiable service attributable to Investment portion of the premium in the present case. In other words the premium amount received was Invested substantially and for managing such investment, admin....