Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (11) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2018 (11) TMI 1452 - AT - Central Excise


Issues:
1. Denial of CENVAT credit on Service Tax paid for manpower supply services for maintaining "Occupational Health Centre" (OHC) at a hazardous manufacturing factory.

Analysis:
1. The appellant, engaged in manufacturing hazardous products, maintained an OHC at its factory to address medical exigencies for workers. The department disallowed CENVAT credit of Service Tax amounting to ?1,17,676 during an Excise Audit, leading to a demand for recovery. The appellant contended that OHC maintenance is mandatory under the Factory Act, 1948, and cited legal precedents to support the argument that first aid facilities for workers are integral to the manufacturing process, thus justifying CENVAT credit.

2. The Department, represented by the Assistant Commissioner, upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision and highlighted Rule 2(l)(c) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, which excluded manpower supply services from CENVAT credit eligibility since July 2012. It was also pointed out that the OHC was considered a Community Health Centre (CHC) where various employees, including contract labor, received general health treatment, implying that the Tribunal should not interfere with the original decision.

3. After considering arguments from both sides and examining relevant documents like the factory license and pollution control board certificates, it was established that the factory was hazardous and required an OHC as per statutory regulations. The appellant had paid 75% of the Service Tax under the Partial Reverse Charge Mechanism and had availed the credit. The Tribunal noted that the OHC was essential for emergency health care in a hazardous manufacturing unit, and denial of CENVAT credit based on lack of separate emergency treatment records was unjustified.

4. The Tribunal found that while health services were excluded from CENVAT credit in the 2012 amendment, the OHC's provision for first aid and primary treatment for employees in case of accidents was a statutory requirement. The facility's availability to other employees at no extra cost did not negate its relation to the manufacturing process. Denying credit due to lack of emergency treatment records was deemed unreasonable, as the OHC served as a contingency/emergency measure even without hazardous incidents.

5. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, overturning the Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals-I), Pune's decision. The appellant was deemed entitled to CENVAT credit for payments made to the service provider for maintaining the OHC, as it was a necessary and integral part of ensuring employee safety and compliance with statutory regulations.

*The judgment was pronounced in court on 26.11.2018.*

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates