TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (12) TMI 1061
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sstt. Commissioner (AR) for the respondent Order This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No: PUN-EXCUS-001 dated 08/10/2015 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune - I whereby the learned Commissioner upheld the order-in-original No. PI/ADC/15/ADJ/103/2014 dated 16/12/2014 and dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant. 2. The fact of the case is that the appellant is engage....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pay service tax under the composite scheme only. 3. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand and the same was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). Therefore, the appellant is before us. 4. Shri Vinay Jain, learned Chartered Accountant appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that though the appellant initially opted for payment of service tax under the composite scheme but immediatel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ubmits that the option of composite scheme and intimation of withdrawal of the same was given on 11/03/2010 and 22/3/2010 respectively. With these two letters, the entire fact that the appellant is intending to pay service tax not as per the composite scheme but as per the service tax payable on the 'erection, installation and commission' service was disclosed. The service tax was paid as per thei....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the option for composite scheme. He place reliance on the decision of this Tribunal in Sunraj Construction v. Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Nagpur [2016 (42) STR 395 (Tri.-Mumbai)]. 6. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. On going through the entire facts of the case I am of the view that the case can be disposed off on the ground of limitation. 7. I f....