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

PJ/Case Laws/2011-12/1004

Whether tax paid on mediclaim insurance and group insurance policy taken for employees or staffs deniable as cenvat credit or not?

Prepared By:
CA. Rajani Thanvi &
Bharat Rathore

 
 
 
Case: - M/s Fiamm Minda Automotive Ltd. Vs CCE, Delhi-IIII
 
Citation: - 2011-TIOL-394-CESTAT-DEL.
 
Issue:-
 
  1.  Whether tax paid on mediclaim insurance and group insurance policy taken for employees or staffs deniable as cenvat credit or not?
  2. Whether credit deniable on CHA service where the goods are exported on FOB basis and ownership retailed till delivery of goods on board the vessel?
  3. Whether Rent a cab service use for transport of vendors and clients from guest house to factory, credit of service tax paid deniable or not??
  4. Whether insuring export of goods relates to business activity, tax paid on insurance of export goods deniable or not??
 
 
Brief Facts:- Appellant had taken credit on various services
  1. Tax paid on mediclaim insurance and group insurance policy taken for employees/ Staff,
  2. CHA services when goods are exported on FOB basis and ownership retailed till delivery of goods on board the vessel,
  3. Rent a cab service utilized for transport of vendors and clients from guest house to factory, and
  4. Tax paid on insurance of export goods.
 

Assessee filed an appeal against commissioner (Appeals) order and department also filed appeal against the same order in respect of certain aspects, which has been decided against the department.
 

Department’s Contention: - Department contention on each of the dispute are as follows:-
 
  1. Group Insurance/ mediclaim Policy:- The department aggrieved that the credit of the service tax paid on mediclaim insurance and group insurance policy taken for their employees/ staff who are not covered by the ESI has been disallowed on the ground that the same cannot be considered as input service in terms of the activities relating to business. The department also said that it is not mandatory for the appellants to take mediclaim policy and accident policy for their employees it is only a welfare measure and therefore it is not treated as business activities.
  2. CHA Service:- The Department challenging the allowing of credit on service tax paid on CHA services.
  3. Rent a Cab service: The Department aggrieved that the credit of the service of rent a cab on the ground that part of service has been utilised for transporting vendors and clients from the guest house to factory and vice versa.
  4. General Insurance for exporting the goods: The department challenging the allowing of credit on service tax paid on General insurance for exporting the goods on the ground that such activities should be treated only as additional business activities. The department pursue that this activity
 
Assessee’s Contention:  Assessee contention on each of the dispute are as follows:-
 
  1. Group Insurance/ mediclaim Policy:- The assessee submit that in respect of category of employees and officials who are not covered by the ESI, they are required to make compensation in the event of illness/ accident. As a prudent business proposition, they incurred expenses by taking mediclaim insurance and personal accident insurance and these expenditures are clearly in the course of business activities and should be treated as input service.
  2. CHA Service:- The assessee submit that as per Para 8.2 of the Boards Circular No. 97/8/2007 dated 23.08.07 the supply of goods for export was on FOB basis and there fore, ownership, possession associated with obligation relating to loss or damage of the goods till they are delivered on board the ship rest with the party and therefore CHA services should be treated as input service.
  3. Rent a Cab Service: The assessee submit that vendors and clients have been transported from the guest hous to factory and vice versa these activities should be treated as business activities in relation to the clearance of final products from the assessee’s factory and the clients are to enable to sell their products and naturally part of the business activities.
  4. General Insurance for exporting the goods:- The assessee submit that insurance for exporting goods is business activity and service tax credit on the same should not be denied to us. 
 
 
 

Reasoning of Judgment: -  The Hon’ble Tribunal heard the submissions of both side and the findings are as under on each of dispute:-
 

  1. Group Insurance/ mediclaim Policy:- The Tribunal held that the issue stands settled against the department by the decision given in Stanzen Toyotetsu India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Bangalore [2009 TIOL-697-CESTAT-Bang]. There is a merit in the appeal filed by the assessee.
  2. CHA Service:- The Tribunal held that the assessee has shown that the goods have been exported on FOB basis and that the ownership is retained till the delivery of the goos on board the vessel until receipt of bill of lading.
  3. Rent a Cab Service: The Tribunal do not find any valid reason for interfere with the order of the  Commissioner (Appeals) in so far as the same relates to the extending the benefit of credit on the service tax involved in the rent – a – cab even when the cars used for transporting vendors and client.
  4. General Insurance for exporting the goods:- The Tribunal held that service tax paid on insurance relating the insurance of export goods treating the same as part of business activity. And do not find any valid reason for interfere with the order of the Commissioner (Appeals)

 

 
 
 

Decision: - Appeal of the department is rejected and the appeal of the assessee allowed.

---------------

 
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