2019 (3) TMI 873 - AT - Service Tax

CENVAT Credit - input services - insurance premium of group mediclaim policies of their employees - period from 01.04.2007 to 31.03.2009 - Held that - There is no dispute about the fact that the issue in question is prior to 1.4.2011 i.e. before the amendment in Rule 2(l) ibid. The definition of input service, post amendment contains exclusion clause and the said exclusion specifically excludes the life insurance/health insurance. The need for exclusion would arise only when such services are otherwise covered by the definition earlier i.e. before amendment. While interpreting Rule 2(l) ibid pre and post amendment, the Tribunal in the matter of M/s. Wipro Ltd. Vs. CCE, Bangalore-III 2018 (4) TMI 149 - CESTAT BANGALORE has observed that the legislature in its wisdom has excluded certain service from the availment of CENVAT credit w.e.f. 1.4.2011, when such service are otherwise covered by the main definition clause of the input service . Meaning thereby that the need to exclude certain services from the definition of input service through amendment arises only when it was included earlier i.e. pre-amendment. Since the insurance has been specifically excluded post-amendment, this itself shows that it was included earlier. Credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues: Denial of Cenvat credit on medical insurance services for the period prior to 01.04.2011.

Analysis:
1. The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai heard the appeal regarding the denial of Cenvat credit on Service Tax paid on insurance premium of group mediclaim policies of employees.
2. The Appellant argued that the medical insurance for employees is necessary for business activities and there is a direct nexus between the expenditure and the business.
3. The definition of "input service" during the disputed period from 01.04.2007 to 31.03.2009 stated that services used directly or indirectly in relation to the manufacture of final products are eligible for credit.
4. The Tribunal referenced the decision of the Karnataka High Court in similar cases, where it was held that group insurance and health insurance policies for employees constitute input services eligible for credit.
5. The Tribunal also cited its own decisions and those of other High Courts, emphasizing that services availed in the course of business are entitled to input service credit.
6. The Tribunal noted that post-amendment, certain services like life insurance/health insurance were excluded from the definition of input services, indicating that they were previously included.
7. Consequently, the impugned order denying Cenvat credit on medical insurance services was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with any consequential relief.

This detailed analysis of the judgment provides a comprehensive overview of the issues involved and the Tribunal's reasoning in allowing the appeal regarding the denial of Cenvat credit on medical insurance services prior to 01.04.2011.