Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2018 (4) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2018 (4) TMI 1834 - AT - Service Tax


Issues:
1. Rejection of declaration under the Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Scheme, 2013.
2. Conditions under Section 106 of Finance Act, 2013.
3. Compliance with notice issuance timeline under the scheme.

Issue 1: Rejection of declaration under the Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Scheme, 2013:
The dispute revolved around the rejection of a tax declaration amounting to &8377; 6,82,375 under the Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Scheme, 2013. The rejection was based on the initiation of proceedings against the appellant for the period from October 2007 to December 2012 related to the 'construction of residential complex'. The Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise (Appeals-II), Mumbai upheld the rejection, leading to the appeal.

Issue 2: Conditions under Section 106 of Finance Act, 2013:
The analysis focused on the conditions stipulated in Section 106 of the Finance Act, 2013, which mandated that the appellant should not have been under investigation or served with a notice as of 31st March 2013. Reference was made to Circular No. 170/5/2013-S.T., dated 8th August, 2013, which clarified that the initiation of an inquiry, investigation, or audit after 1st March 2013 did not bar an assessee from filing a declaration. The appellant's representative cited precedents like Siddhi Vinayaka Enterprises Pvt Ltd and V.S. Enterprises to support their argument.

Issue 3: Compliance with notice issuance timeline under the scheme:
The records revealed that the show cause notice proposing rejection was issued on the 18th of August 2015, exceeding the 30-day timeline for notice issuance after the declaration filing. The failure of the competent authority to adhere to the scheme's prescribed conditions regarding notice issuance rendered the rejection of the declaration erroneous. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, emphasizing the importance of procedural compliance in such matters.

*(Pronounced in open Court)*

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates