Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  GST registration cancellation without reasons amounts to ‘Economic Death’ of business: Supreme Court. *  No GST refund if appeal before GSTAT is filed late: Gujarat High Court. *  Mere upload of GST notice on portal not valid service, appeal limitation won’t start: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Taxpayer can’t be penalised for missing notices hidden under ‘Additional Notices/Orders’: Calcutta High Court allows fresh adjudication. *  State tax officer can’t issue GST SCN beyond CBIC-assigned jurisdiction: Bombay High Court stays recovery proceedings. *  Earlier 7.5% Pre-Deposit must count towards mandatory 10% for Appeal: Uttarakhand high court quashes CESTAT Order. *  Third Parties can’t challenge GST Advance Rulings merely due to financial impact: Karnataka HC *  GST SCN generated using AI tool quashed: Punjab & Haryana High Court *  Bank Attachment Quashed as Madras HC Quashes GST Order Issued Against Deceased Person *  ITC Blocking Order for Failure to Record ‘Reason to Believe’ U/R 86A Quashed: Allahabad High Court *  Govt Extends GSTAT Appeal Filing Deadline From 30 June to July 31, 2026 *  GST Demand on RWA Stayed: Allahabad High Court Questions Taxability of Electricity Distribution to Flat Owners *  CBIC Clarifies Jurisdiction After GST Registration Transfer: Earlier Proceedings Remain Valid, New Officer to Continue Action *  GST authorities’ certification not mandatory for reimbursement, but tax payment must be proven: Karnataka HC *  Contractor can’t seek gst reimbursement through writ when contract has arbitration clause: Karnataka HC *  Unsigned Order Is No Order in Law: AP HC Quashes GST Assessment Order for Want of Officer’s Signature *  Customs Can’t Levy Rs. 1.36 Crore Cost Recovery Charges Without Proof of Full-Day Officer Deployment: CESTAT  *  12% IGST Payable On Imported Dialysis Machine Parts: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Admits Challenge to GST Limitation Extension Notifications; Grants Protection Against Coercive Recovery *  Criminal Case Can’t Run Parallel to GST Proceedings on Same Facts: Allahabad High Court *  Allahabad High Court Stays GST Detention Order; Directs Release of Vehicle and Goods on Deposit of Rs. 1.44 Lakh *  Service Tax Can’t Be Levied on Loss-Making Contracts: Gujarat High Court *  GSTN Mandates Ship-to GSTIN in e-Invoice and e-Way Bill APIs; Introduces Voluntary e-Way Bill Closure Facility from August 1, 2026 *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected as Time-Barred When Taxpayer Was Pursuing Rectification Remedy: Telangana High Court *  Absence of E-Way Bill and Transport Documents Justifies Customs Seizure U/s 110: Gauhati HC *  Madras High Court Upholds GST Late Fee and Penalty for Non-Filing of Annual Return, Dismisses Challenge  *  GST Records, Purchase Documents Sufficient to Discharge Burden Under Customs Act: CESTAT Orders Release of 3.65 Kg Gold  *  No Sugar Cess Payable on Sugar Exported Out of India: CESTAT *  Road Construction Services Exempt and SCN Time-Barred: CESTAT Quashes Service Tax Demand Based Solely on Form 26AS  *  ITC Freeze Upheld After GST Dept Find Suppliers Were Allegedly Fake Bill-Trading Entities: Madras HC 
Subject News *  Input service benefits can’t be denied: CESTAT allows export refund despite MMTC acting as Canalising agency. *  No service tax demand without proof of service of SCN: CESTAT. *  Service tax demand quashed as dept. fails to prove service of SCN: CESTAT *  GST : Mere allegation of inadequate consideration of reply not enough to invoke writ jurisdiction: Delhi High Court *  Onerous conditions imposed for provisional release of seized imported goods shouldn’t amount to virtual denial of relief: CESTAT. *  GST SCN without alleging fraud cannot invoke sec. 74: Karnataka High Court quashes adjudication order. *  Extended Limitation Can’t Be Invoked Merely on Form 26AS Data: CESTAT *  Revenue-Sharing with Restaurants Not Taxable as Business Support Service: CESTAT *  R. 6(3) Option Can’t Be Forced on Taxpayer; CESTAT Quashes Rs. 12.36 Crore CENVAT Credit Demand *  Excise Duty | Power Consumption Alone Can’t Prove Clandestine Manufacture: Karnataka High Court *  Madras High Court Examines DGGI’s Authority to Issue GST Penalty Orders Under Section 122, Adds DGGI as Party *  Proceedings under omitted r. 96(10) can’t survive without saving clause: andhra pradesh high court quashes gst refund recovery *  Excise duty power consumption alone can’t prove clandestine manufacture: karnataka high court *  Madras high court rules GST show cause notices must disclose grounds for invoking extended limitation *  Court Can’t Direct Extension GST Return Deadlines or Waive Interest and Penalties: Karnataka High Court *  GST Notifications Can’t Go Beyond GST Council Recommendations: Madras High Court Quashes SCN on Branded Pulses *  Appeal Can’t Be Dismissed for Delay When Dept’s Own Order Mis-states Limitation Period: CESTAT *  No Evidence of KYC or Due Diligence Breach By Customs Broker: CESTAT Quashes Licence Revocation in Export Overvaluation Case *  Glucometers Are Chemical Analysis Instruments Classifiable Under Tariff Heading 9027: CESTAT *  Validity of Post-GST Service Tax Proceedings Upheld: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Challenge to S. 73 SCN *  Rectified GST Refund Applications Can’t Be Rejected as Time-Barred If Original Refund Claim Was Filed Within Limitation: Gujarat HC *  Service Tax Refund Can’t Be Denied as Time-Barred When Levy Itself Is Unconstitutional: Gujarat High Court *  Same Officer Can’t Act As Auditor & Adjudicator: Karnataka High Court *  Karnataka High Court Condones 324-Day Delay, Revives Customs Appeal in Jewellery Pilferage Case  *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Order Passed Ex Parte Despite Prior ITC Reversal; Lifts Bank Attachment *  Tobacco Process Doesn’t Amount to Manufacturing: Madras High Court Quashes Rs. 1.32 Crore Compensation Cess Demand  *  Recovery Notice Unsustainable After Voluntary Reversal of Unutilised Credit: CESTAT  *  GST | ‘System Generated’ SCN Without Officer Details Invalid: Allahabad HC  *  Electronic Records Without Statutory Certification Requirements Can’t Justify Undervaluation Allegations: CESTAT *  Madras High Court Stays GST Order, Finds Prima Facie Merit in Plea Against S. 74 Proceedings Based on S. 73 Intimation  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

Update On ITC on supply of Medical Facility to employees by employer

Update On ITC on supply of Medical Facility to employees by employer
Update On ITC on supply of Medical Facility to employees by employer
 
In this update we shall discuss about allowability of ITC on supply of Medicines and medical facilities to employees and pensioners. M/s Chennai port trust have preferred application seeking advance ruling on the following questions:-
  1. Whether they are entitled to take credit of input tax charges on the inward supply of medicines which are used or intended to use in the course or furtherance of business of the applicant?
The applicant submits that they are engaged in supply of port services and incidental supply of goods like disposal of discarded assets. They are maintaining an in-house hospital for providing health and medical cover exclusively to their employees and pensioners. They are governed by two regulations under Section 124(11) read with section 132(i) of Major Port Trusts Act 1963, which are (i) Chennai Port Trust Employees' (Contributory Outdoor and Indoor Medical Benefit After retirement) Regulations, 1989; (ii) Chennai Port Trust Employees' (Medical Attendance in the Trust's Hospital and Reimbursement of Hospital Charges) Regulations 1994.The hospital is only a cost centre and the inward supplies of medicines are provided only to the employees and pensioners free of cost.
Applicant Submissions:-The term “health service” is not defined in the Act or rules. The health and medical cover provide by the applicant will not get covered under definition of “Service” under section 2(102) of the act as no separate consideration is charged. Hence, the ITC for these inward supplies are not blocked credits under section 17(5)(b)(i) of the CGST Act,2017. These medicines cannot be considered as “goods used for personal consumption” since the cost of these medicines are borne by us as a part of service contract with its employees and pensioners as held in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages (p) Ltd. V. CCE (2015) 56 Taxmann.com 378/51 GST126 (Mum-CESTAT). The medicines are used in course of furtherance of business as per section 16 and are not blocked credit under section 17(5) (g) , consequently the applicant is eligible for ITC on inward supply of medicines under section 16(1) subject to fulfilment of rules 36 to 45 of CGST Rules.
Respondent’s Submissions:-The respondent submits that the activity of the applicant is providing port services and sale of disposal of discarded assets. Providing medical cover to their employees and pensioners are not part of their business activity and providing medical facility is being done only under service rules. Moreover, the medicines supplied to their employees and pensioners are free of supply. In view of the above fact the applicant is not eligible to claim ITC on inward purchase of medicines to be supplied to their employees for the reason that this activity is not their part and parcel of their activity and supply of medicines without any consideration amount to free supply, hence the applicant is not eligible for ITC.
Advance Ruling Authority’s View: -The medicines and medical facilities are provided by the applicant to its employees for their personal use. Therefore as per section 17(5) (g) of CGST/ TNGST Act, ITC is not available for the medicine that the applicant is procuring the consumption of its employees and pensioners and their dependents. The fact of who pays for the medicines here is irrelevant to the usage of the said medicines. They are used by the employees and dependents and hence are for personal consumption and the applicant is ineligible to take ITC on the inward supply of medicines used to provide health facilities to its employees in its hospital.
Ruling: -The applicant is not entitled to take credit of input tax charged on the inward supply of medicines which are used to provide medical facilities to the employees, pensioners and dependents in the in house hospital.
Normally, the businessman provides health care service to employees only due to the fact that it is required as service contract. These are in furtherance of business only. Hence, credit should be allowed. The expenditure is allowed in Income Tax also. Hence, it should be allowed and it will create credit chain also. There will not be cascading effect also.
Further, the transaction between employer and employee has been matter of dispute only. Firstly, in this row was the reimbursement of expenses by employer to employee was subject to reverse charge when unregistered had provided the service. Whether the service provided by employees of one branch to another branch in another state will be liable to GST. These points should be clarified by CBEC so that unnecessary litigation can be avoided.
This is solely for educational purpose.

You can reach us at www.capradeepjain.com, at our facebook page on https://www.facebook.com/GSTTODAYBYPRADEEPJAIN/as well as follow us on twitter at https://www.twitter.com/@capradeepjain21.
Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com