9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 319X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct amount disclosed, one typographical error cannot dis-entitled the appellant from the benefit of the scheme in so far as the amount declared therein dues concerned. APMC contract - some amount was held back by APMC as security deposit. The Service Tax liability on the said amount works out to ₹ 44,903/-, appellant had accidentally failed to consider the said liability while declaring the VCES declaration - Held that: - the appellant had failed to consider this said amount in VCES declaration, no benefit in respect of said duty and penalty can be granted to the appellant. Appeal disposed off - decided partly in favor of appellant. - ST/86214/16 - A/85503/17/SMB - Dated:- 23-1-2017 - Mr. Raju, Member (Technical) Shri.J.N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Sections 70/77 may be set aside. 4. Learned AR relies on the impugned order. He argued that the appellant has admitted to the mis-declaration and therefore, penalty needs to be imposed. 5. I have considered the rival submissions. I find that there are two aspects involved in this dispute. First relates to the so called clerical error in the entitled VCES declaration for the Service Tax liability of ₹ 4,08,857/-. It is an admitted fact that the appellant had wrongly mentioned in Sl.No.6 of the said declaration. The tax liability of ₹ 4,08,857/- admitted by them was correctly declared in the enclosures attached to the said declaration. The appellants have also admittedly paid 50% of the said liability amounting to S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be in order and deemed to be accepted under the scheme, read with the provisions of Finance Act, 2013. 6. It is seen that in the instant case, the appellant has fulfilled his actual tax liability at the time of filing the declaration and the enclosures contained correct amount disclosed, one typographical error cannot dis-entitled the appellant from the benefit of the scheme in so far as the amount declared therein dues concerned. 7. In so far as the demand of ₹ 44,903/- is concerned, it is apparent that the appellant had failed to consider this said amount in VCES declaration, no benefit in respect of said duty and penalty can be granted to the appellant. In view of the appeal is partially allowed. ( Pronounced in Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
