9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 243X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant s hospitals are engaged in providing health care services, which can be done by appointing the required professionals directly as employees and same also can be done by having contractual arrangements. There are no necessity to decide the issue of invocation of extended period of limitation or imposition of interest and penalty on the appellant - the demand proceedings against the Appellant hospital are hereby dropped - appeal allowed. - MS. BINU TAMTA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Ms. Priyanka Goel, Advocate for the appellant Shri Rohit Issar, Authorised Representative for the respondent ORDER 1. M/s. Life Care Hospital Ltd. [The Appellant] aggrieved by the Order-in-Appeal No.IND-EXCUS-000-APP-13-2023-24 dated 20.04.2023, whereby the demand of service tax has been confirmed under the category of Business Auxiliary Service while rendering health care service . 2. The appellant is engaged in providing the taxable service namely, Health Club Fitness Service, Renting of Immovable Property Service and Health Care Service. The Department on the basis of Form 26AS ascertained that the appellant had collected amount from Life Care Medicos, i.e. in-house Medical store under Section 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng their nominal service charges. Therefore, the amount received from M/s. Life Care Medicos is nothing but service charges related to preparation and collecting the mediclaim of patient including claim of medicine charges of M/s. Life Care Medicos. The learned Counsel relied on the definition of Clinical Establishment as per Section 2(j) and health care service under Section 2(f) of the Notification No.25/2012 and also referred to the decision in the case of Sir Ganga Ram Hospital Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-I [2018(11)GSTL 427 (Tri.-Del.)]. 6. The learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue reiterated the findings of the authorities below and distinguished the decision in the case of Sir Ganga Ram Hospital as it related to the collection charges, facilitation fee concerning the doctors. 7. The question involved is whether the service charges taken by the appellant from the medical shop is covered under the health care services , which are exempted as claimed by the appellant or as per the revenue the same is actually collected as Commission and falls under the category of Business Auxiliary Service . 8. The appellant is running the hospital and is rendering he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any service by way of diagnosis or treatment or care for illness, injury, deformity, abnormality or pregnancy in any recognized systems of medicines in India and includes services by way of transportation of the patient to and from a clinical establishment, but does not include their transplant or cosmetic or plastic surgery, except when undertaken to restore or to reconstruct anatomy or functions of both affected due to congenital defects, developmental abnormalities, injury or trauma. 11. The two definitions of clinical establishment and healthcare service clearly shows that they have been worded very broadly so as to include the various services, which are connected with the healthcare service and are inbuilt in it. The appellant who is running the hospital is squarely covered by the definition of clinical establishment , which at the outset says the clinical establishment means hospital and is rendering the healthcare services as defined therein. The definition of healthcare service when it uses the term diagnosis or treatment or care for illness, etc. by any recognised system of medicines, denotes that the provision for medicines to the patients is directly connected to the h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rrowing down the definition of health care service with a view to bring within the tax net, which is contrary to the intention of the legislature to exempt the heath care service . 14. In the case of Sir Ganga Ram Hospital (supra), the Revenue had alleged that the collection charges/facilitation fee retained by the hospital are liable to service tax under the category of business support services . The claim of the Revenue was that the hospital had provided infrastructural services to various doctors and the amount retained by the hospital out of the total charges collected from the patients should be considered as an amount for providing infrastructure like rooms and certain other secretarial facilities to the doctors to attend to their work in the appellant s hospitals was rejected by the Tribunal observing that the appellant s hospitals are engaged in providing health care services, which can be done by appointing the required professionals directly as employees and same also can be done by having contractual arrangements. In such arrangements, the doctors of required qualifications are engaged or contractually appointed to provide health care services. The Tribunal took the vie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
