TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Overturns VCES Rejection, Emphasizes Genuine Efforts</h1> <h3>Aegle Shiva Construction Pvt. Ltd. Versus CCE, Delhi-I</h3> Aegle Shiva Construction Pvt. Ltd. Versus CCE, Delhi-I - TMI Issues:1. Appeal against rejection of declaration under Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Scheme, 2013 (VCES).2. Interpretation of Section 107(4) of the VCES Scheme regarding payment deadlines.3. Technical issue with online payment link leading to delayed payment.4. Comparison with relevant case laws.5. Adjudication of the appellant's efforts and bonafide intentions.Issue 1: Appeal against rejection of VCES declarationThe appellant filed a declaration under the Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Scheme, 2013 (VCES) for Service Tax declaring tax dues of Rs. 45,94,212. 50% of the tax liability was deposited by the due date, and the remaining amount was to be paid by 31st December 2014. However, due to a technical issue with the online payment link, the remaining dues could only be paid on 01.01.2015. The declaration was rejected, and the appeal was filed before the Commissioner (Appeals), who upheld the rejection. The appellant appealed to the Tribunal.Issue 2: Interpretation of Section 107(4) of VCES SchemeThe key issue was the interpretation of Section 107(4) of the VCES Scheme, which mandated the payment of remaining tax dues by 31st December 2014. The appellant argued that the delay was due to a technical defect beyond their control, emphasizing the bonafide nature of the mistake. The appellant challenged the rigid interpretation of the Commissioner (Appeals) and cited relevant case laws to support their argument.Issue 3: Technical issue leading to delayed paymentThe technical issue with the online payment link resulted in the appellant being unable to pay the remaining tax dues by the deadline. The appellant made efforts to deposit the amount on 31st December 2014 but could only complete the payment on 01.01.2015. The Department justified the rejection based on the strict interpretation of the VCES Scheme's payment deadlines.Issue 4: Comparison with case lawsBoth parties relied on case laws such as Kasmisons Builders Pvt. Ltd. to support their arguments regarding delayed payments and the interpretation of the VCES Scheme's provisions. The Tribunal considered these references in evaluating the present case.Issue 5: Adjudication of appellant's efforts and intentionsAfter hearing both parties, the Tribunal analyzed the payment history and the bonafide efforts of the appellant to comply with the VCES Scheme. The Tribunal noted that the entire payment, including interest, was made by 01.01.2015, despite the technical issue causing a delay. The Tribunal opined that the strict interpretation of the Scheme's deadlines was not justified in this case, considering the appellant's genuine attempt to make the payment on time.In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside the order rejecting the declaration under the VCES Scheme, allowing the appeal based on the circumstances, bonafide efforts of the appellant, and the timely payment made by 01.01.2015.
TaxTMI 