2019 (3) TMI 1679

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri Bharat Raichandani, Advocate, for appellant Shri M.K. Sarangi, Additional Commissioner (AR), for respondent ORDER Per: S.K. Mohanty Heard both sides and perused the records. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in providing works contract service and for that purpose, was registered with the jurisdictional Service Tax authorities. During scrutiny of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....demand of Rs. 27,07,015/- was confirmed under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 along with interest under Section 75 of the Act. Besides, the adjudication order also imposed penalty under Section 76 of the Act. On appeal, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned order dated 29.04.2013, has upheld confirmation of the adjudged demand on the ground that no option had been exercised by t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....her in the statute or by any circular issued by the Board, under which the option has to be exercised. Thus, nonfiling of specific declaration before opting for the scheme is to be considered as a mere procedural lapse, for which the substantive right provided under the statute for payment of composition tax cannot be whittled down. Further, we also find that though the appellant had availed the c....