Nelcast Ltd Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai-Outer Commissionerate
Central Excise
2018 (12) TMI 367 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 4-12-2018
Appeal No. E/41556/2018 – FINAL ORDER No. 42990/2018
Central Excise
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial)
Sh. K. Vijayasimhudu, Sr. Advisor – Indirect Tax. For the Appellant
Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy, ADC (AR) For the Respondent
ORDER
Brief facts are that the appellants are engaged in manufacture of Machined and Unmachined Iron Castings. They avail the facility of Cenvat credit on inputs, goods and input services. During the course of scrutiny of records, it was noticed that they availed Cenvat credit of service tax paid on Employe
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
hudu appeared and argued the matter. He submitted that the insurance policies are aimed to compensate the workforce in the event of any accident or untoward incident that may lead to injury or demise during the course of employment. Such insurance is not merely a welfare measure, but the appellant is duty bound to have such policies as envisaged under Workmen Compensation Act. Even the policy is specifically taken as under the Workmen Compensation Insurance Scheme. Therefore the credit is eligible. He further submitted that in the appellant's own case for the period after 1/4/2011 also, vide OIA No.58/2013 (M-II) dated 21.10.2013 the said services were held to be eligible for credit. This was not considered by the lower authority.
3. The L
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
udicating authority dropped the demand. In the appellant's own case for the period October 2007 to May 2011, the department has allowed credit as per OIA No.58/2013 (M-II) dt.21.2.2013. The Commissioner (Appeals) have totally disregarded this decision. Instead of analysing the reason for allowing credit on such services after 1/4/2011, the Commissioner (Appeals) has brushed aside this order stating that major part is prior to 1/4/2011. I do not think this is sufficient reason to deviate from abiding the judicial discipline. The mechanical approach to issues without application of mind increases litigations.
6. The Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the recent decision in Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.2926/2017 dt.19/9/2018 in the case of M/s.
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =