TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (9) TMI 1584
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pectively. 2. Shri. R. Raghavan, Ld. Advocate, appeared for the assessee and Smt. P. Hemavathi, Department Representative appeared for the Revenue. 3.1 The contentions of Ld. Advocate for the assessee for the sake of brevity are summarized below: * M/s. Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Limited, the Appellant, is engaged in providing the services of General Insurance, and inter alia, extends Motor Insurance Policy for motor vehicles against theft, damage and third-party liability. * In the case of Motor Vehicle Insurance, the indemnification could be either by way of full compensation for theft or total loss or by way of restoration of the damage to the vehicle. It is the obligation of the insurance company to provide the indemnit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ures the vehicle against damages. It is obvious that such service can be provided to the customer ie., owners of the vehicle only by way of reimbursement of the repair charges. We are unable to see any other way by which the vehicle insurance service can be delivered to the customer. In this scenario, we are of the view that the service tax paid on the bill of the ASS is to be considered as falling within the definition of the input service which is used for providing the output service of the vehicle insurance. 6.4 The appellant has relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the Paul Merchants case (supra). We have gone through the said decision in which the Tribunal has made a distinction between the beneficiary of a service and the reci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ant for Cenvat credit. In the present case, the appellant being the service receiver will be entitled to the credit of service tax paid in terms of Rule 2 (l) ibid. 6.6 The Revenue has also raised the issue that the invoices issued by the ASS which is the document based on which the appellant has availed the Cenvat credit, is invariably in favour of the owner of the vehicle and is not in favour of the appellant. Hence, Cenvat credit cannot be allowed to the appellants. As discussed above, we have held that the above service is eligible to be considered as an input service for the appellant. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we appreciate that the invoices will be issued by the ASS only in favour of the vehicle owners wh....