TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 1054X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to 01.04.2011 is no more res integra, since the same has been laid to rest by the orders of various judicial fora. It is seen that on an identical set of facts, the Mumbai Bench of the CESTAT in its order in the case of PTC SOFTWARE (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE-III [ 2014 (12) TMI 498 - CESTAT MUMBAI] , relied upon by the Learned Advocate for the appellant, has followed the judgements of the Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the cases of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE SERVICE TAX VERSUS MICRO LABS LTD. [ 2011 (6) TMI 115 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] and COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BANGALORE-III, COMMISSIONERATE VERSUS STANZEN TOYOTETSU INDIA (P.) LTD. [ 2011 (4) TMI 201 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] to hold that cre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... documents of the appellant for the period from April 2010 to March 2011, it was noticed by the Revenue that the appellant had availed CENVAT Credit of Service Tax paid based on invoices issued by their Head Office at Chennai, in their capacity as Input Service Distributor (ISD), who are registered vide Registration No. AAACE0702CST001; that upon scrutiny of documents, it was noticed that the appellant had availed credit of Service Tax paid in respect of Mediclaim Insurance Service obtained from M/s. Cholamandalam MS General Insurance, the details of which are as under:- Sl. No. Document No. Policy No. Irregular Service Tax credit availed 1. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, with appropriate interest, and imposed penalty of Rs.1,09,932/- on the appellant under Rule 15(3) ibid. Thereafter, the appellant preferred appeal before the First Appellate Authority, who passed the order impugned herein, confirming the denial of CENVAT Credit by the Adjudicating Authority and thereby rejecting the appeal filed by the assessee. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal has been filed before this forum. 4. Shri M.N. Bharathi, Learned Advocate, appeared for the appellant and Shri S. Balakumar, Learned Departmental Representative appeared for the Revenue. 5.1 At the outset, Learned Advocate for the appellant would submit that the issu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntral Excise, Pune-III [2015 (4) TMI 1063 CESTAT, Mumbai]; (iii) M/s. BNY Mellon International Operations (I) Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-III [2016 (45) S.T.R. 116 (Tri. Mum.)]; (iv) M/s. EXL Service.com (I) Pvt. Ltd. v. Commr. of Central Excise Service Tax, LTU [2017 (5) TMI 1461 CESTAT, New Delhi] (v) M/s. Prism Cement Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhopal [2019 (369) E.L.T. 1205 (Tri. Del.)]. 6. Per contra, the Learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue, while referring to paragraph 10 of the impugned Order-in-Appeal, would submit that in the case on hand, no documents have been furnished by the appellants indicating that the premium was uniform to all employees and ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... PTC Software (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Commr. of Central Excise, Pune-III [2014 (35) S.T.R. 632 (Tri. Mum.)], relied upon by the Learned Advocate for the appellant, has followed the judgements of the Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the cases of Commissioner of Central Excise Service Tax. v. M/s. Micro Labs Ltd. [2012 (26) S.T.R. 383 (Kar.)] and Commr. of C.Ex., Bangalore-III v. M/s. Stanzen Toyotetsu India (P) Ltd. [2011 (23) S.T.R. 444 (Kar.)] to hold that credit of Service Tax paid on insurance premium on group insurance policy is allowable since the said service is an eligible input service. The above order in M/s. PTC Software (India) Pvt. Ltd. was referred to by the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Faurecia Interior Sys ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
