9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 279X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the respondent P.C. 1. This appeal under section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 (the Act) read with Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 challenges the order dated 15th May, 2018 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal). 2. The impugned order of the Tribunal allowed the respondent's appeal by following its order dated 23rd March, 2018 in respect of the same respondent assessee on an identical issue. 3. The Revenue being aggrieved by the order dated 23rd March, 2018 passed by the Tribunal had preferred an appeal to this Court being Central Excise Appeal No. 20 of 2019 (Commissioner of CGST Vs. Toyo Engineering India Ltd.) and the same was dismissed by this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or its employees . On the above issue, the Commissioner Service Tax proceeds to hold that the respondent assessee is not entitled to take Cenvat credit of the Service Tax paid on the premium paid on the mediclaim policy taken of its employees. 6. Being aggrieved with the order dated 17th September, 2014 the respondent filed an appeal to the Tribunal. By the impugned order dated 23rd March, 2018, the Tribunal allowed the respondent's appeal. This by holding that for the period up to March, 2011, the respondent was entitled to Cenvat credit on service tax paid in respect of the insurance premium for mediclaim policies for its employees. This on the basis of the definition of inputs under the Cenvat Rules upto 31st March, 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aforesaid question which arises from the order of the Tribunal does not give rise to any substantial question of law as the issue stands concluded in favour of the respondent assessee and against the Revenue by the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Axis Bank Ltd. (Central Excise Appeal No.167 of 2018, rendered on 20th December, 2018). For the reasons indicated in the order passed in Axis Bank Ltd. (supra), the question as arises from the impugned order of the Tribunal does not give rise to any substantial question of law. Thus, not entertained. 4. It is an agreed position between the parties that the questions raised herein on the facts and in law arising in the present case are identical to the one wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
