2026 (7) TMI 233

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in Original No. 76/Commr/ST-II/KOL/2016-17 dated 21.10.2016 passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax-II Kendriya Utpad Shulk Bhawan, Kolkata wherein the demand of Service tax of Rs.2,68,969/- and 10,488/- has been confirmed along with interest and penalty. 2. The Appellant submits that the demand of Rs.2,68,969/- has been raised and confirmed on the basis of the closing balance of Debtors available in their Balance Sheet under the head of Servicing of Motor Vehicles. The Appellant submitted that following the basic principle of Accountancy, the Debtors balance being the principal ledger Balance, contains gross amount which includes VAT as well as Service Tax. However, the Ld. Commissioner of Service Tax, while arriving at the Taxable V....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f section 108 (1) of the Finance Act 2013, the declarant, upon payment of the tax dues declared by him under sub-section (1) of section 107 and the interest payable under the proviso to sub-section (4) thereof, shall get immunity from penalty, interest or any other proceeding under the Chapter. Thus, the appellant submits that the demand confirmed on account of rate difference later is not sustainable. 3. The Ld. A.R. reiterated the findings in the impugned order. 4. Heard both sides and perused the appeal documents. 5. Regarding the demand of Rs.2,68,969/- confirmed in the impugned order, we find that the said demand has been raised on the basis of the closing balance of Debtors available in the Balance Sheet maintained by the App....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed in terms of section 108 (2) of the Finance Act, 2013. We find that the amount of Rs.10,488/- has been confirmed on account of a Service Tax Rate difference in the year 2008-09. In this regard, we observe that once appellant availed the VCES scheme, the issue shall not be reopened thereafter in any proceedings relating to the period covered by such declaration, even though the VCES 3 i.e. the discharge certificate has not been issued. As far as the Appellant is concerned, they have availed the scheme and paid the amount as declared by them in the VCES. Subsequently, if there is any short payment is noticed on account of rate difference, the said amount declared by the appellant and appropriated by the competent authority cannot be reopene....