TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (12) TMI 50
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lating to Service Tax Voluntary Compliance Encouragement 1. the Finance Act Scheme 2013 [the 2013 scheme] contained in Chapter VI of the Finance Act arises in this appeal. 2. The appellant claims that as it had not made a true declaration of the service tax dues in the return filed by it for the period April, 2012 to September, 2012, it filed a declaration on 19.12.2013 under section 107 of the Finance Act enhancing the liability for the said period from Rs. 64,67,443/- to Rs. 66,98,098/-. The department however, denied the benefit for the said period to the appellant and so the present appeal has been filed. 3. To appreciate the contentions advanced by Shri Arvind Singh Chawla, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Shri Har....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g production of accounts, documents or other evidence under the Chapter or the rules made thereunder; or (b) an audit has been initiated, and such inquiry, investigation or audit is pending as on the 1st day of March, 2013, then the designated authority shall, by an order, and for reasons to be recorded in writing, reject such declaration." 5. The term "tax dues" has been defined in section 105(e) of the Finance Act in the following manner: "105(e) tax dues means the service tax due or payable under the Chapter or any other amount due or payable under section 73A thereof, for the period beginning from the 1st day of October, 2007 and ending on the 31st day of December, 2012 including a cess leviable thereon under any ot....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uly 1, 2014 onwards; (iii) on compliance with all the requirements the person will have immunity from interest (as specified), penalties and other proceedings;" (emphasis supplied) 8. In the instant case, the appellant had earlier reflected the following amount as payable in the service tax returns for the period April, 2012 to September, 2012; Return Period Amount Payable (Rs.) Apr-12 to Jun-12 31,87,750 Jul-12 to Sep-12 32,80,023 Total Payable 64,67,773 9. In the declaration filed by the appellant under the 2013 Scheme on 19.12.2013 for the period October, 2011 to December, 2012, the amount was indicated as Rs. 1,05,31,854/-. It needs to be noted that for the period from April 2012 to September....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....5,31,854/- for the reason that it did not fall within the provisions of section 105 and section 106 of the Finance Act. The relevant portion of the order is as follows: "12. ***** I therefore find that provisions of Section 106(1) of the Finance Act, 2013 read with provisions of Section 105 allows only that part of service tax due or payable under "tax dues" which has not been declared in ST-3 return under section 70 of the Chapter and such left out part will constitute part of "tax dues" and the declarant taking the shelter of provisions of Section 106 can not dispute the amount of service tax assessed & declared by them in their St-3 under the garb of true liability. Once the return has been filed under Section 70, the p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....red in ST-3 return does not come under in the ambit of VCES scheme. Ones the return has been filed under Section 70 ibid, the provision relating to recovery of confirmed dues shall apply and therefore in the impugned order, VCES-1 dt 19.12.2013 has been rightly rejected by the adjudicating authority. The Order of High Court and other case Laws referred by the Appellant does not help them due to clear violation of said provision as discussed above. 8. In view of above discussions the Appeal filed by the Appellant is dismissed and the impugned order is upheld." (emphasis supplied) 13. Shri Arvind Singh Chawla, learned counsel for the appellant placed the provisions of section 106 of the Finance Act and contended that in terms o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tax or any part thereof shall not be eligible to make a declaration for the period covered by the said return. Thus, it is only in a case where a person has disclosed his true liability but has not paid the disclosed amount of service tax or any part thereof that a person would not be eligible to make a declaration for the period covered by the return. A person who claims that he has not disclosed his true liability in the return and has not paid the amount can, therefore, file a declaration under section 107(1) of the Finance Act. Some emphasis has to be placed to the word "true" occurring before "liability" in the first proviso to section 106 of the Finance Act. If the word "true" was not there, then of course the contention advanced by l....