9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 50X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nst the petitioners by the adjudicating authority. The issue involved in the said scheme also relates to the non-payment of the service tax on the component of GTA, Maintenance & Repair Service and BAS. The second proviso envisaged an embargo in making a declaration even for a subsequent period on the same issue. - Court, therefore, does not find that the authorities have, in fact, wrongly applied the said provision. The writ petition is devoid of merit - Decided against assessee. - W. P. 24867(W) of 2014 - - - Dated:- 15-12-2014 - The Hon ble Justice Harish Tandon,JJ. For the Petitioners : Mrs. Seba Roy, Mr. Sukalpa Seal For the Respondents : Mr. P.K. Roy, Mr. K.K. Maity ORDER Harish Tandon,J. After coming in force of the Service Tax Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Scheme, 2013, the petitioners filed a declaration under subsection (1) of Section 107 of the Finance Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as said Act ), admitting the tax dues and the liability for payment thereof pertaining to the period 2010-2012. The authorities rejected the said application invoking the second proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 106 of the said Act as a show caus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... service tax and seeks waiver against imposition of penalty and interest. The said scheme was restricted on the service tax dues between the period from 1st day of October, 2007 to 31st day of December, 2012. It would be relevant to quote the definition of the tax dues assigned in the said scheme, which runs thus: (e) tax dues means the service tax due or payable under the Chapter or any other amount due or payable under Section 73A thereof, for the period beginning from the 1st day of October, 2007 and ending on the 31st day of December, 2012 including a cess leviable thereon under any other Act for the time being in force, but not paid as on the 1st day of March, 2013. Sub-section (1) of Section 107 of the said Act requires an assessee to make a declaration to a competent authority on or before 31st day of December, 2013 in such form and in such manner as may be prescribed. To set the said scheme in motion it was obligatory on the part of the defaulting assessee to deposit not less than fifty per cent of the tax dues so declared on or before 31st day of December, 2013 and the remaining tax within 30th day of June, 2014. However, a further time till 31st day of December, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terial facts recorded therein. Section 111 of the said Act specifically provides that in the event the designated authority has reason to believe that the declaration does not contend the true and correct facts, the same is liable to fail as a person cannot be allowed to avail the benefit under the said scheme by suppressing the material facts. As indicated above, the case of the authorities is based upon invocation of second proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 106 of the said Act and there is no reflection in the impugned order, which may infer that the authorities have further invoked Section 111 of the said Act. The case not made out by the authorities cannot be allowed to be made at the Bar. The counsel representing the authorities should restrict the argument on the case made out by the authorities and is not supposed to make the case or to bring additional provisions or the facts in support of the ultimate conclusion arrived by the authorities. Be that as it may, since this Court intends to restrict the consideration on second proviso to Section 106(1) of the said Act, which has been applied in extenso by the authorities, let the case be examined on such parameter whe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... done in respect of any period, the designated authority was not obliged to issue declaration for any subsequent period on the same issue. The literal meaning, which could be attributed to the second proviso, is that in the event there is a similarity in an issue between an earlier notice or a proceeding, which is finally determined, the same issue shall not be adjudicated and/or determined for any subsequent period. There are two significant words used in the said proviso, namely, any issue and subsequent period . What is standing in the way of the designated authority in making a declaration is the similarity in issue and not the period, which is required to be looked into. If the meaning is restricted to the period, it would frustrate the legislative intend when the expression subsequent period is incorporated in the second proviso. The legislative intend, which could be gathered therefrom is that the issue once decided cannot be allowed to be adjudicated and/or reopened for any subsequent period. The Division Bench of Delhi High Court in the above noted report, the facts, which emanates from the said report is that the vocational training institute for air hostesses/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
