9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 345X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oticed that they had availed input service credit on insurance services during the period from April 2016 to June 2017. According to department, general insurance / insurance auxiliary service are not covered under the definition of input service used for providing output service as they had no nexus with the provision of output service and therefore became ineligible for input service credit. Show cause notices were issued proposing to demand an amount of Rs. 1,74,869/- along with interest and also for imposing penalties. After due process of law, the original authority confirmed the demand, interest and also imposed penalty. In appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the same. Hence this appeal. 2. On behalf of the appellant, ld. counsel S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so submitted by him that for the earlier period, in the appellant's own case, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide Order-in-Appeal No. 534/2017 dated 29.12.2017 had allowed the credit in respect of transit insurance as well as umbrella fixed asset policy. He also relied on the decision of the Tribunal rendered in their own case reported in 2018 (10) TMI 563 - CESTAT Chennai wherein the Tribunal has allowed the credit in respect of error and omission insurance policy. 3. The ld. AR Ms. T. Usha Devi supported the findings in the impugned order. She submitted that these type of insurance policies are only to cover risk which occur occasionally and not intended for use in the ordinary course of business. Therefore they have no nexus with the output ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aside, which I hereby do. 5.2 The third type of insurance policy is umbrella fixed asset policy. The appellant has taken this insurance policy to cover the risk such as fire, theft, weather damages of the fixed assets of the appellant as well as those goods that have been installed within the premises of the customer. The ld. counsel for appellant has explained that routers and such equipment are installed in the premises of the customers for providing output service. These are assets of the company and are owned by the company and only for providing service, it is installed in the customers' premises. This insurance policy is taken to cover the risk of fixed assets and is eligible for credit. Hence the disallowance is unjustified. Furthe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
