Commissioner Of Central Excise And Service Tax Delhi-South vs. Oriental Insurance Company LTD.
Held
The Delhi High Court held that re-insurance services were not excluded from the definition of 'input service' under Rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, during the period in question. Therefore, OIC was entitled to avail CENVAT credit.
Facts
The Revenue appealed a CESTAT order allowing Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. (OIC) to avail CENVAT credit on re-insurance services. The Revenue argued that CENVAT credit was unavailable for insurance in respect of motor vehicles during the relevant period.
Key Issues
Whether re-insurance services qualify as 'input service' for availing CENVAT credit, and if the exclusion clause for motor vehicle insurance applies to re-insurance.
Sections Cited
Section 35G, Section 83, Rule 2(l), Rule 3(1), Rule 14, Section 73(1), Section 73(4)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
The appellant has filed the above-captioned appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereafter ‘the Central Excise Act’) read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 (hereafter ‘the Act’) impugning a final-order dated 28.01.2021 (hereafter ‘the impugned order’) passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereafter ‘CESTAT’). By the
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Delhi High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.