9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1525X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against which no appeal was preferred by the Revenue, the matter has attained finality. Therefore, present appeal filed against the impugned order date 6th September, 2017 cannot be maintained. Communication of letter - Held that: - Section 37C of the Central Excise Act, 1944 mandates that in case of speed post, the proof of delivery of the letter has to be obtained by the sender - In this cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CES) on 23.08.2013 for payment of Service Tax amount of ₹ 19.40,732/-, being the dues on rental income from immovable property belonging to his late father Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta (who expired on 17.06.2011). The respondent had paid the entire Service Tax dues of the declared amount on 19.11.2013. Thereafter, the Department issued the SCN dated 24.09,2013, proposing rejection of the VCES appl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondent and since the letter was not returned back by the Postal Department, it has to be construed that the same has been received by the respondent. Thus, according to the Revenue, the VCES declaration of respondent is not maintained under Section 106 (2) of the VCES. Accordingly, it is prayed that the impugned order is not legal and proper. 2. The ld. DR appearing for the Revenue supports the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta is no more in existence, proceedings cannot be initiated against the legal heirs for recovery of the interest and penalty amount. 4. Heard both sides and perused the records. 5. I find that the issue arising out of the present dispute i.e. declaration under VCES, 2013 has already been concluded by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order dated 19.10.2016, holdin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... post, the proof of delivery of the letter has to be obtained by the sender. In this case, since no acknowledgement of proof of delivery of said letter has been produced by Revenue, it has to be construed that the letter dated 05.06.2012 has not been received by the respondent. Thus, the provisions of Section 106 (2) of VCES is not applicable for rejection of the declaration filed by the responden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
