Raj Electrical Engineering Works Versus The Commissioner Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax (Now the Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Commissionerate Aurangabad.)
Service Tax
2018 (9) TMI 1672 – BOMBAY HIGH COURT – 2018 (18) G. S. T. L. 595 (Bom.)
BOMBAY HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 12-7-2018
CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.6 OF 2018
Service Tax
PRASANNA B. VARALE & S. M. GAVHANE,JJ.
\nMr. Alok Sharma, Advocate h\/f Mr R.S. Indani, Advocate for appellant;
\nMrs. (Dr.) Kalpalata Patil Bharaswadkar, Advocate for respondent sole.
\nORAL ORDER :
\nHeard Mr. Alok Sharma, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and Mrs. Bharaswadkar Patil, learned Counsel for the respondent sole.
\n2. There is no dispute on the facts that the appellant subjected himself to a scheme known as 'Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Scheme'.(for short, 'VCES'). Certain rules are also framed and they are known as 'Service Tax Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Rules, 2013'<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n irstly reference is made to the absence of the appellant, the tribunal subsequently by observing that VCES being a self contained code under Finance Act, 2013 without any appeal provision in the scheme dismissed the appeal holding that the appeal is not maintainable. He then submits that dismissal of appeal on the ground of no provision in the scheme is unsustainable. He further submits that basic Act itself provides remedy of appeal and merely because such appeal remedy is not a part of same scheme, the appeal ought not to have dismisseed by the tribunal on the ground that there is no provision in the scheme of appeal. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n by Madras High Court as well as Punjab & Haryana High Court. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Raj Electrical Engineering Works Versus The Commissioner Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax (Now the Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Commissionerate Aurangabad.)Service Tax2018 (9) TMI 1672 – BOMBAY HIGH COURT – 2018 (18) G. S. T. L. 595 (Bom.)BOMBAY HIGH COURT – HCDated:- 12-7-2018CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.6 OF 2018 Service TaxPRASANNA B. VARALE & … Continue reading “Raj Electrical Engineering Works Versus The Commissioner Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax (Now the Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Commissionerate Aurangabad.)”<\/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-14120","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14120","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=14120"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14120\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=14120"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=14120"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=14120"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n6. Mr. Sharma, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant by placing heavy reliance on the judgment of Madras High Court in the matter of Narasimha Mills Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.(Appeals), Coimbatore, reported in 2015(39) S.T.R. 795 (Mad.) submitted that the very issue fall for consideration before the Madras High Court and the Madras High Court, by specif<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n9. It would be useful to refer observations of Madras High Court on the issue in paragraph Nos. 18 and 19, which read thus :
\n“18. Further, it is relevant to note that the Service Tax Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Scheme, 2013 has been introduced by the Central Government, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 114 of the Finance Act, 2013 (17 of 2013) with effect from 13-5-2013 by Notification 10\/2013 and hence, it is not a self-contained code, but is to be construed as a part and parcel of the Chapter V of the Act, 1994 in view of the contents of Section 105 of the Finance Act, 2013. Therefore, when the said scheme itself is construed as part and parcel to the Finance Act, all other provisions of the Act except to the extent specifically excluded would automatically apply to proceedings under the scheme and consequently, I am of the view that the order, dated 15-11-2013 passed by th<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n