9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1442X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce Encouragement Scheme) under Section 107 (1) of Chapter VI of Finance Act, 2013, declaring tax dues of Rs. 44,77,468/- relating to the security agency services for the period from April 2009 to December 2012. It was noticed by the Department that a show-cause notice against the same appellant for the same services for the period from April 2005 to March 2009 was issued on the grounds that second proviso to Section 106(1) of the Act stipulates that where a notice or an order of determination has been issued to a person in respect of any period on any issue, no declaration shall be made of his tax dues on the same issue for any subsequent period. Since the tax dues declared pertains to the service tax liability on security agency services ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mean that the First Proviso to subsection (1) of Section 106 of the Finance Act, would come into operation, since the scheme was introduced with a view to collect dues from such service tax assessee who had either stopped filing returns or not filed returns for the period October 2007 to December 2012. He further submitted that the rejection of the application of the appellant on the ground of issuance of earlier notice dated 20.102010 is to defeat the intention of the Government. In support of his submission, he relied on the decision rendered in the case of Pace Setter Business Solutions Pvt. Ltd.: 2017 (52) STR 11 (Bom.) wherein it was held that VCES cannot be defeated by holding that on the earlier occasion parties like the petitioners ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f service tax or any part thereof, shall not be eligible to make a declaration for the period covered by the said return. Provided further that where a notice or an order of determination has been issued to a person in respect of any period on any issue, no declaration shall be made of his tax dues on the same issue for any subsequent period". 6.1 Further, I also find that the Commissioner (A) has also considered the decision in the case of Durga Diesel Sales and Services cited supra and by following that ratio, he has rejected the application. Here it is pertinent to reproduce the relevant findings contained in the impugned order, which is reproduced herein below: "In the present case, the show-cause notice dated 20.10.2010 issued for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
