9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 728X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... He confirmed demand of Rs. 3,08,672/-, interest under Section 75 and also imposed penalty of equal amount under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 2. The fact of the case is that the appellant filed VCES declaration on 31.12.2013 wherein the total dues declared was Rs. 2,78,118/-. The appellant as per the provisions paid 50% of the said amount i.e. Rs. 1,39,100/- on 31.12.2013. The second installment of 50% i.e. Rs. 35,288/- and Rs. 1,03,730/- on 13.5.2014 & 30.06.2014 respectively. On finalization of balance sheet, the Chartered Accountant pointed out from the reconciliation of the total gross receipt and it was found that the gross receipt was shown short and accordingly the total dues was declared short by Rs. 35,288/- . The appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. Commissioner has not given any finding on the issue of abatement and declared the entire case on the basis that the declaration made by the appellant is substantially false. He submits that the gross amount receipt is inclusive of food/catering therefore they are legally entitled for the abatement of 40% as provided under Notification No. 1/2006-ST. As regard the allegation of false declaration, he submits that the mistake has occurred only due to arithmetical error, which they have corrected suo moto without pointing out by the department. The appellant have paid the entire amount of dues before the due date and in case of short payment in the first installment of 50%, they also paid interest as provided under the scheme. Therefore in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion, I find that the mistake has occurred due to arithmetic error in quantifying the due and the same was pointed by the appellant themselves and made good by making the payment of correct amount, and for the delay in making the payment, they also paid the interest. From this fact, I do not find any intention of the appellant to make a false declaration. This is only due to arithmetical error that there is mistake in declaring the actual dues. I also find that the appellant have paid the entire amount of correct dues along with interest before the last date i.e. before 31.12.2014. Therefore, I do not find any reason why the VCES declaration should not be accepted. In view of my above discussion, I set aside the impugned order and allow the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
