9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (8) TMI 735X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant. Shri Vijay Kumar, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : D.N. Panda, Member (J)]. - Ld. Authorized Representative Shri A.K. Gupta has challenged the adjudication order submitting that adjudication was done in respect of works contract executed by the appellant for the pre-composition period as well as post-composition period and such adjudication was done unreasonably. Pre-composition pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x demand of Rs. 22,36,276/-. 1.2Ld. Authorised Representative further submits that when the composition scheme came into force on 1-6-07 to levy Service tax by a composite rate, the appellant opted for that scheme in terms of his letter dated 21-6-07 filed before the authority. There was no objection by the Department against exercise of such option. Therefore, such option remained valid for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... scheme after the period 1-6-07 in view of option exercised. The appellant has so done in terms of letter dated 21-6-07 (subject to verification) and that was not denied by the Department. There is no embargo in the law that an option cannot be exercised. The appellant has stated to have deposited Rs. 3,64,089/- which is patent from table under para 43 of the order of adjudication. So also we noti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
