Kamala Mills Ltd Versus Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise Mumbai Central
Service Tax
2018 (6) TMI 332 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI
CESTAT MUMBAI – AT
Dated:- 22-3-2018
ST\/87780\/2017 – A\/86122\/2018
Service Tax
Shri M V Ravindran, Member (Judicial)
\nShri Darshan Ranawat, Chartered Accountant for appellant
\nShri Dilip Shinde, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for respondent
\nORDER
\nThis appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No: PK\/26\/MC\/17-18 dated 31\/07\/2017 passed by the Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise (Appeals- II) Mumbai.
\n2. Heard both the sides and perused the records.
\n3. The issue that falls for consideration in this case is whether both the lower authorities were correct in dismissing the VCES declar<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n pecifically clarified that if the designated authority has reason to believe that the declaration is covered by Section 106(2) of the Customs Act, 1962, shall give a notice of intention to rejection within 30 days from the date of filing of the declaration. It is his submission that in the case in hand, there is a delay of 1 ½ years. He relies upon the decision of the Tribunal holding such rejection of VCES is not correct, as is decided in the case of Abhi Engineering Corporation v. Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Nagpur 2015-TIOL-2197-CESTAT-MUM; Sidhi Vinayaka Enterprises Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner of Service Tax, Raipur 2016 (43) STR 474 (Tri.Del.) and V.S Enterprises V. Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs,<\/p>\n = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n on of the VCES declaration lies before the Tribunal, hence this appeal is maintainable. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Kamala Mills Ltd Versus Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise Mumbai CentralService Tax2018 (6) TMI 332 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMICESTAT MUMBAI – ATDated:- 22-3-2018ST\/87780\/2017 – A\/86122\/2018Service TaxShri M V Ravindran, Member (Judicial) Shri Darshan Ranawat, Chartered Accountant for appellant Shri Dilip Shinde, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for respondent ORDER This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal … Continue reading “Kamala Mills Ltd Versus Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise Mumbai Central”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-12070","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12070","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=12070"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12070\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=12070"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=12070"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=12070"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n6. As regards the issue involved in this case, I find merit in the submissions made by the Learned Chartered Accountant. It is the fact that the appellant had filed the VCES declaration on 18\/12\/2013 and the notice issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Service Tax – II is dated 18\/08\/2015 for rejection of VCES declaration. I am surprised that this notice was issued by the lower authority when the CBEC Circular dated 18\/08\/2013 was in the knowledge of the department, wherein CBEC has clearly clarified that notice for rejection of VCES scheme should be issued within 30 days.
\n7. The law as decided by the decisions of the Tribunal in the case<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n