2019 (7) TMI 654

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....issioner. 2. As per facts on record, the appellant is a proprietor firm engaged in fixing of aluminium and glass structures in their customers' premises. During the relevant period they were not registered with the Service Tax department and as such were not discharging the Service Tax liability. They got themselves registered in December 2010 with the Service Tax department under the category of 'works contract' and opted to pay Service Tax on the basis of composition rules. 3. With the introduction of VCES Scheme in the year 2013, they filed an application under the said scheme declaring the duty liability for the period October 2007 to November 2010 to the extent of Rs. 8,88,974/-. Subsequent to the filing of the said declaration R....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ice Tax authorities to raise the demand beyond the period of five years. As regards the balance period, he submits that they have already filed a declaration under VCES scheme for the said period. The adjudicating authority has enhanced the amount so declared by them only on the ground that post their registration in the year December 2010, they have opted for composition scheme and as such while calculating the duty for the period in question, the same has to be calculated on the basis of the composition scheme only by treating their option as applicable for the prior period also. On the other hand the assessee's contention is that their option filed in December 2010 was only for the subsequent period and the same cannot be held to be appl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....show cause notice, we find that the appellants have filed VCES declaration declaring the tax dues to the extent of Rs. 8.88 Lakhs. The demands stands raised by the adjudicating authority by applying the rates in terms of the composition nrules, whereas the assessee's contention is that the provisions of Rule 2A of Service Tax Valuation Rules were required to be adopted. We find favour with the above contention of the learned Advocate. Admittedly the composition rules are applicable on an option exercised by the assessee. Such an option was exercised by the appellant only w.e.f. December 2010 onwards. In the absence of any option having been exercised for the period in question, the applicability of the composition rules cannot be upheld.....