Appeal No. ST/50449/2015-ST-SM ST/CO/50713/2015 (Arising out of OIA No. 101/ST/DLH/2014 dated 30.9.2014 passed by the CCE(Appeals), New Delhi) and Final Order No. 52828/2015. Case: CST Vs Bharti Lakhani. CEGAT (Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal) & CESTAT (Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal)
| Case Number | Appeal No. ST/50449/2015-ST-SM ST/CO/50713/2015 (Arising out of OIA No. 101/ST/DLH/2014 dated 30.9.2014 passed by the CCE(Appeals), New Delhi) and Final Order No. 52828/2015 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: G.R. Singh, AR and For Respondents: Akhil Gupta, CA |
| Judges | Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (J) |
| Issue | Finance Act, 1994 - Section 85; Finance Act, 2013 - Sections 105, 114 |
| Judgement Date | September 10, 2015 |
| Court | CEGAT (Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal) & CESTAT (Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal) |
Order:
Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (J), (Principal Bench, New Delhi)
-
The respondent is a proprietorship firm engaged in the activity of 'renting of immovable property service' and is registered with the Service Tax Department. The scheme called Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Scheme (VCES), 2013 was floated by the Government under the Finance Act, 2013. The scheme offered immunity from payment of interest and penalty to the tax payer who was in default. A condition was prescribed that the declarant has to deposit 50% of declared tax dues before 31.12.2013 so as to be included in the scheme. The respondents filed their application in Form VCES-1 dated 30.12.2013 declaring the tax dues as Rs. 4,64,663/- and also deposited 50% of tax dues before 31.12.2013 as prescribed under the scheme. Though the respondent declared amount of service tax dues a Rs. 4,64,663/-, the correct tax dues was only 3,85,064/-. An amount of Rs. 79,599/- which was paid by the respondent in 2009 prior to introduction of the scheme and was wrongly included in the total tax dues. The designated authority therefore took the view that respondent has committed default of paying 50% of the declared tax dues. Therefore, the declaration filed by the respondent was rejected by designated authority by issuing a communication to this effect directing the respondent to discharge tax dues alongwith interest and penalty.
-
Aggrieved with rejection of VCES declaration, the respondent filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). On scrutiny of records, the first appellate authority observed that though the respondent herein had erroneously included Rs. 79,599/- in declaring the total tax dues, the amount of Rs. 2,13,752/- which was deposited by the respondent on 26.12.2013 was sufficient to comply with condition of deposit of 50% of the declared tax dues. The appeal filed by the respondent was thus allowed directing the designated authority to issue an order accepting the declaration of tax dues under VCES, 2013 scheme and allowed immunity from the interest and penalty on declared tax dues deposited under the scheme. The present appeal is filed challenging the above order of the Commissioner (Appeals) on two grounds: (1) VCES, 2013 does not have any statutory provision for filing appeal against the order passed rejecting the declaration and (2) that the designated authority has not passed any such order and has only issued communication rejecting the declaration. That as...
To continue reading
Request your trial