TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 187X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Works Contract and that the non-intimation to the Department prior to payment of Service Tax has to be considered as a procedural infraction. The non-intimation of availing the composition scheme is only a condonable lapse and that appellant has to be allowed to pay Service Tax under the composition scheme for Works Contract Services. The appellant is liable to pay Service Tax on such taxable value, however, at the reduced rate under the composition scheme - Appeal allowed in part. - Service Tax Appeal No. 00033 of 2011 - FINAL ORDER NO. 42354 / 2021 - Dated:- 1-10-2021 - MS. SULEKHA BEEVI C.S., MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND MR. P. ANJANI KUMAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Joseph Prabakar, Advocate for the Appellant Shri Vikas Jha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The relevant paragraphs are as under: 10. We do not find anything in the order of the learned Tribunal, which could deny the benefit of the Composition Scheme to the Assessee and therefore, the order of remand passed by the learned Tribunal on 01.06.2018 directing the Assessee to go for regular assessment instead of Composition Scheme merely because the option was not conveyed to the Department on the part of the Assessee in writing, even though the Revenue had not prescribed any format for the same, could not be a valid ground to deny the benefit to the Assessee. If a previously rendered judgment of the same Tribunal authored by the same Member was brought to the notice of the learned Tribunal by way of a Rectification Application, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtment. 3.2 He relied upon the decision in the case of M/s. Vaishno Associates (supra) to argue that the very same issue was considered by the Tribunal and it was held that the benefit of payment of Service Tax under the composition scheme for Works Contract Service cannot be denied merely on the ground of failure to file intimation to the Department prior to payment of Service Tax. The said decision was followed by the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Kunnel Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. v. C.C.E. S.T., Cochin reported in 2020-VIL-294-CESTAT-BLR-ST where, in paragraph 7, the Tribunal held as under: 7. The next issue that arise for consideration is with regard to demand raised for the reason that the appellant did not intimate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; the taxable value should be the gross amount received for the works contract excluding the Sales Tax/VAT paid. That this means that the value of equipment supplied should form part of the taxable value and the taxpayer has to exercise such option prior to payment of Service Tax. That the option so exercised shall be applicable for the entire works contract and cannot be altered in between before the completion of the works contract. The works contract also includes, in its scope, erection, commissioning and installation of equipments, whether pre-fabricated or otherwise and turnkey projects. That in the present case, even though separate contracts have been entered by the appellant for supply portion, erection portion and civil works port ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ibunal had remanded the matter in the earlier round of litigation for clarity in determining the taxable value on which the appellant would be liable to pay Service Tax under composition scheme. 5. Heard both sides. 6. At the outset, it is made clear that the Learned Counsel for the appellant has put forward argument only as to the rejection of the claim of the appellant for payment of Service Tax under the composition scheme. It is argued by him that the appellant ought to have been allowed to discharge Service Tax under the composition scheme for Works Contract and that the non-intimation to the Department prior to payment of Service Tax has to be considered as a procedural infraction. 7.1 In paragraph 37 of the impugned order, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
