2018 (9) TMI 1659 - AT - Service Tax

Rectification of mistake - case of applicant is that the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal has extended the benefit of Composition Scheme in the case of M/s. Vaishno Associates Vs Commissioner of Central Excise and Service tax, Jaipur-I 2018 (3) TMI 417 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - Held that The Tribunal, in the said decision has denied the benefit of the Composition Scheme as the appellant has failed to exercise the option under the relevant Rules - To a specific query from the Bench learned Advocate, admitted that the said decision of the Tribunal was not brought to the notice of the Bench during the hearing. In the circumstances, there is no ground for modification of the final order already issued. Any such modification as prayed by the appellant would amount to review of the order already passed, which is not permissible under rectification of mistake application - Under ROM only such mistakes which are apparent from the record may be corrected. ROM Application dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Entitlement to benefit of Works Contract Composition Scheme.
2. Denial of benefit due to failure to exercise option under relevant Rules.
3. Request for modification of final order through Rectification of Mistake application.

Entitlement to benefit of Works Contract Composition Scheme:
The judgment involved a dispute regarding the entitlement of the appellant for the benefit of Works Contract Composition Scheme in relation to service tax payment for various contracts executed. The Tribunal held that the appellant would be entitled to the benefit of assessment under Works Contract Services, with service tax payable only on the value of the service portion. The matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for extending such benefit upon the production of documentary evidence by the appellant.

Denial of benefit due to failure to exercise option under relevant Rules:
The appellant filed a Rectification of Mistake (ROM) application challenging the Final Order, arguing that the Tribunal failed to consider a similar decision by the Delhi Bench where the benefit of Works Contract Composition Scheme was extended despite a belated intimation. The Authorized Representative opposed the application, stating that the appellant had not exercised the option for the Composition Scheme as required under the Rules. The Tribunal noted that the benefit was denied due to the appellant's failure to exercise the option, and any modification would amount to a review of the order, which is not permissible under a ROM application.

Request for modification of final order through Rectification of Mistake application:
The appellant sought modification of the final order to extend the benefit of the Composition Scheme based on a decision from the Delhi Bench. However, the Tribunal dismissed the ROM application, stating that there was no ground for modification as the appellant had not brought the relevant decision to the notice of the Bench during the hearing. The Tribunal emphasized that rectification of mistakes under ROM is limited to those apparent from the record, and modifying the final order in this case would constitute a review, which is beyond the scope of a ROM application.

---