9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 1378X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax dues as Rs.9,988/- to the Designated Authority namely Assistant Commissioner (Technical), Central Excise & Service Tax, Vadodara-II for availing benefit of the Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Scheme (VCES). The department is of the view that the appellant has not made a true and truthful declaration under VCES scheme and basic premises on which the declaration of the appellant was rejected as follows:- "4. Whereas, it appears that the Assistant Commissioner, City Division, Vadodara-II vide the above said letter, has reported that as per the calculation sheet attached with the VCES application for the period October-2012 to December-2012, the assessee has calculated Service Tax after taking abatement of 75% and then again availed ab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee along with the said application, it appears that the calculation made by the assessee is wrong where they calculated their tax liability by claiming abatement; assessee registered themselves under "Construction service other than residential complex service" and got it amended to "works contract service" of Finance Act, 1994 on 17.1.2014; thus, it appear that the said service provided by the assessee during October'12 to December'12 does not qualify for any abatement by virtue of any notification. Thus, it appears that the declaration made by the assessee under VCES, 2013, availing abatement on account of reverse charge mechanism, declaring their service tax value wrongly and their by declaring their service tax to Rs.9,98 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 15. Following challan copies were produced by the assessee along with their defence submission: Challan No. Challan date Amount 30042 01.12.2012 90781 30040 01.12.2012 64795 30020 29.11.2012 999999 000085 14.05.2012 187327 16. I noticed from the 'accounting code' and 'description' of the challans that these payments were made by the assesssee by classifying their service as all these pay service and not under "works contract service"; assesse paid rs. 5,500/- towards their Ist instalment of VCES, 2013 but they have not paid their IInd instalment amount which was due by 30-6-2014. 17. I notice that the assessee, in their VCES, 2013 declaration filed on 28.12.2013, declared their service t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... am of the view that the Adjudicating Authority has not considered the work invoices issued by the appellant. While deciding the matter, the Adjudicating Authority has not decided whether the activity undertaken by the appellant falls under the category of "Works Contract Service" or under "Construction Service". I am also of opinion that the Adjudicating Authority while holding the subject activity falls under commercial construction service, he has also not provided the facility of the abatement of the value as provided under Notification No.13/2012-ST dated 28.06.2012 while confirming the demand of service tax. I take note of the fact that while the appellant has been claiming that activity undertaken by them falls under category of "Wor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
