2017 (11) TMI 1577

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eclaration made by the appellant Aggrieved by the order of the designated authority, an appeal was preferred before the first appellate authority. The first appellate authority in the order impugned, has held that appellant having not complied with the condition of paying the amount, accepted as per declaration to the credit of Central Government, the rejection of VCES declaration is correct. 4. Ld. Counsel after taking me through the facts of the case submits that the appellant had filed VCES declaration alongwith cheque of the amount which he has to deposit and the said declaration was accepted by the department. He would submit that the declaration was not scrutinised immediately and subsequently after two days the cheque was returned....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on 2013 or otherwise and (2) whether on merits both the lower authorities were correct in holding that appellant has not discharged the VCES application for making payment to the Govt. of India within the time. 7. As regards the issue whether an appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal against VCES declaration, I find that the Single Member Bench of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Nizam Ladji [2017-TIOL-3610-CESTAT-MUM] has passed the following order: "The applicant has challenged the Order-in-Original dated 31.12.2014 passed by the adjudicating authority rejecting the declaration made under VCES 2013. Cd. Commissioner (Appeals) as also dismissed the appeal on limitation. From Reading of the scheme, it appears that there is no ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the lower authority rejected the VCES application of the appellant on the ground that 50% of tax dues declared have not paid before 31.12.2013 and submission of non valid instrument i.e. cheque, in terms of Section 107 of the Finance Act, 2013. The appellant in this regard submitted that the cheque is a valid instrument for the purpose of payment of 50% of service tax and hence the rejection of VCES application of the appellant is contrary to the provision of Section 107 of Finance Act, 2013 and VCES Rules, 2013 and hence not sustainable. It is pertinent here to examine the relevant provisions of law referred by the appellant to support their contention. Rule 6 of SERVICE TAX VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE ENCOURAGEMENT RULES, 2013 is reproduce....