TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1733X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rejection of the declaration on the grounds mentioned in Section 106(2)(a)(iii) – Impugned order set aside in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. ST/85131/15 - - - Dated:- 23-9-2015 - Anil Choudhary, Member (J) For the Petitioner : Shri Varun Vijaywargi, CA For the Respondent : Shri S R Nair, Examiner (AR) ORDER Per Anil Choudhary The appellant, M/s Abhi Engineering Corporation is in appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. NGP/EXCUS/000/APP/14-15 dated 13.10.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise Customs (Appeals), Nagpur by which it has been held that the application filed by the appellant under the Service Tax Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Scheme, 2013 (VCES in short), has been rightly rejected. 2. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urther contended that the appellant is eligible to declare tax dues under the VCES in accordance with the first limb. Further, the appellant had also annexed a letter dated 20.9.2012 received from DGCEI, Mumbai (requiring the appellant to produce account, documents or records) along with declaration under VCES. Upon receipt of the appellant's application, the designated authority after examining the same have issued acknowledgement under form VCES-2 (acknowledgement of declaration under VCES), indicating prima facie approval of the declaration made. It was further contended that the appellant have followed the procedure prescribed for making the declaration of the Tax Dues and have also made the payment of Tax Dues as per declaration an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase is squarely covered under Section 106(2)(a)(iii). Accordingly, the appellant was held to be barred under provisions of Section 106(2)(a)(iii) from filing declaration under VCES. So far the issue of limitation raised by the appellant is concerned, with respect to clarification issued by CBE C vide Circular No. 170/5/2013-ST dated 8.8.2013, where it is provided that notice of intention to reject the declaration shall have to be given within 30 days from the date of filing the declaration. It was held that the said clarification was issued on 8.8.2013 and under normal circumstances, the notice was supposed to be issued by 7.9.2013. As the appellant have not disclosed the fact of the notice of DGCEI dated 20.9.2012 in their VCES application ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 2013. 3.1 Further, with form VCES-1, the appellant had annexed a copy of letter dated 20.9.2012 received from DGCEI. Thus, no case of suppression of any material facts, as required, is made out against the appellant. Also the findings recorded in the Order-in-Original that the appellant has not declared or disclosed anything in the declaration form regarding the enquiry letter from DGCEI, is factually wrong on the face of the records. It was further urged that the enquiry letter of the DGCEI is of a roving nature making only a general enquiry with respect to whether the appellant is registered under the provisions of Central Excise Service Tax. DGCEI asked the appellant to submit the documents like, registration certificates, copy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ible. 3.2 So far the issue of limitation is concerned, although time limit of one year is prescribed under Section 111(2), in case where the Commissioner has reasons to believe that the declaration made under the scheme is substantially false, which is not the case in the appellant's case. Further, by way of clarification, the CBE C vide Circular dated 8.8.2013 have clarified that the designated authority, if he has reason to believe that the declaration is covered by Section 106(2), shall give the notice of intention to reject the declaration within 30 days of filing of the declaration, stating the reasons for proposed rejection. The said clarifications have been reiterated in the subsequent Circular dated 25.11.2013, further mentio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
