TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 654X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... licable on an option exercised by the assessee. Such an option was exercised by the appellant only w.e.f. December 2010 onwards. In the absence of any option having been exercised for the period in question, the applicability of the composition rules cannot be upheld. As such the demand has to be quantified in terms of the provisions of Rule 2A of Service Tax Valuation Rules, by taking into account the VAT assessment orders. Matter remanded to the adjudicating authority for fresh quantification of the demand against the appellant for the period falling within five years from the date of show cause notice. - Service Tax Appeal No.53368, 52954 of 2015 - FINAL ORDER NO. 71309-71310/2019 - Dated:- 5-7-2019 - MRS. ARCHANA WADHWA, ME ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CES declaration and confirming the demand of Service Tax to the tune of around ₹ 31.32 Lakhs (approx.). The said show cause notice resulted in passing of the present impugned order by the Commissioner vide which he confirmed the demand to the extent of ₹ 31.32 Lakhs and also held the appellant liable to penalty under section 78 of the Finance Act. However, while imposing penalty, he took into consideration the amount of ₹ 8.88 Lakhs already deposited by the appellant under VCES scheme and reduced the penalty to that extent. The Revenue is aggrieved with such reduction of penalty and has filed the present appeal, whereas the assessee has challenged the same very impugned order for confirmation of demand and imposition of pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of Rule 2A of Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006. He clarifies that for the period in question, all the contracts entered by them with their customers separately show the value of the goods as also the value of the services and are clearly bifurcable. They have paid VAT on the goods involved for which purposes there is VAT assessments orders by VAT authorities. As such it was possible for the Revenue to calculate the tax liability in terms of the provisions of Rule 2A of the Service Tax Value Rules. 6. Learned A.R. appearing for the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 7. After appreciating the submissions made by both the sides and after going through the impugned orders, we f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9. In view of the above, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the adjudicating authority for fresh quantification of the demand against the appellant for the period falling within five years from the date of show cause notice. 10. As regards the Revenue s appeal, the same is only against the adjustment of the deposits already made by the appellant in terms of the provisions of VCES scheme. We note that the VCES declaration filed by the assessee was not finalized and in fact the same is the subject matter of the present impugned order. As such any deposits made by the appellant under the said scheme are required to be adjusted against the liability of the assessee either against demand or against penalty. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
