High Court remands Works Contract service assessment issue for rectification by Tribunal. Composition scheme benefit allowed for non-intimation lapse.

The High Court remanded the issue of Works Contract service assessment back to the Tribunal for rectification of a mistake in the previous order. It held that failure to convey the option in writing should not deny the benefit under the composition scheme. The Tribunal allowed the appellant to pay Service Tax under the composition scheme, considering non-intimation as a condonable lapse. The taxable value in the Show Cause Notice remained unchanged, but the appellant could pay at a reduced rate under the composition scheme.

---

---

Issues:
1. Rectification of mistake regarding remanded issue by the Tribunal.
2. Denial of benefit under the composition scheme due to non-intimation to the Department.
3. Interpretation of Works Contract service and eligibility for the composition scheme.

Analysis:
1. The appellant filed for rectification of mistake after the Tribunal remanded the issue regarding Works Contract service assessment. The High Court remanded the matter back to the Tribunal, emphasizing the need to rectify the mistake in the previous order.

2. The issue of denial of benefit under the composition scheme due to non-intimation to the Department was raised. The High Court held that failure to convey the option in writing should not be a valid ground to deny the benefit. The Tribunal had to rectify the mistake and allow the appellant to pay Service Tax under the composition scheme.

3. The eligibility for the composition scheme under Works Contract service was extensively discussed. The Department argued that the contract should involve transfer of property in goods and services, with the option exercised prior to payment of Service Tax. The Tribunal found that the non-intimation of availing the composition scheme was a condonable lapse and allowed the appellant to pay Service Tax under the composition scheme. The taxable value mentioned in the Show Cause Notice remained unchanged, but the appellant could pay at the reduced rate under the composition scheme.

---