TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 974X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nterpret the provisions of the statutory scheme differently, in order to relax the conditions prescribed in the scheme - rejection of the VCES declaration upheld. Demand of interest - Held that: - Since the retrospective Validation amendment to levy the service tax on the taxable service on renting of immovable property was introduced by the Finance Act, 2010, w.e.f 01.07.2010, the interest demand should only be confined to the date of introduction of such levy i.e. 01.07.2010 - the interest charged by the designated authorities from 01.06.2007 cannot be sustained and the appellant will be liable to pay interest only from 01.07.2010. Appeal allowed in part. - Service Tax Appeal No. ST/51618/2017-ST [SM] - Final Order No. 51525 /2018 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and paid the amount, aggregating to ₹ 27,04,927/- on 30.01.2015. The VCES declaration filed by the appellant was dismissed by the designated authority on the ground that there is no power vested with the authorities for weaving or relaxing the condition of payments stipulated under Section 107 of the Finance Act, 2013, for obtaining the benefits provided therein. Besides, the designated authority also confirmed the interest demand for the period from 01.06.2007. On appeal, the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned order dated 03.05.2017 has upheld rejection of VCES declaration by the designated authority. 3. The ld. Consultants appearing the appellant submitted that the scheme of VCES, 2013 does not provide for rejection of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erein. Since the authorities functioning under the statue are guided by the dictates under the statue, they cannot interpret the provisions of the statutory scheme differently, in order to relax the conditions prescribed in the scheme. Therefore, I am of the view that for non fulfillment of the condition regarding payment of the dues within the specified time limit, rejection of the declaration by the authorities below cannot be interfered with at this juncture. 7. The designated authority, in this case, has confirmed the interest demand from 01.06.2007, for the delayed payment of service tax by the appellant. Since the retrospective Validation amendment to levy the service tax on the taxable service on renting of immovable property was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
