ST - the assessee herein was a partner in a partnership firm, which rented out immovable property - The Department raised duty demand - The Department noted that the firm had opted for VCES scheme & had paid the duty demanded in two instalments - Besides, certificate in proforma VCES-3 was issued - Inspite of the same, duty demand was imposed with equivalent penalty - On appeal, the Commr.(A) set aside such findings - Held - After coming to know about the facts of filing of VCES application when passing the Order-in-Original, it was responsibility of the Original Authority to close the proceedings since there was no jurisdiction to adjudicate - Hence the SCN proposing such duty is unsustainable u/s 111 of the Finance Act, 1994: CESTAT (Para 3,6) - Appeal Dismissed: ALLAHABAD CESTAT

ST - Assessee is a Central Government Department - A SCN was issued proposing demand of Service Tax alongwith interest and to impose penalty under category of "Courier Service" & "Business Auxiliary Service" - Assessee acted on basis of office of Comptroller General of Accounts - It is revealed that tax was paid by assessee and the final accounts were submitted to CGA for submission to Service Tax authority - The Commissioner (A) observed that contention of assessee is not acceptable as genuine and legally correct in view of provisions of Rule 6 (2) and (2A) of STR, 1994 - Payment of Service Tax by book adjustment was not denied by lower authorities - The Adjudicating Authority observed that book adjustment cannot be treated as payment of Service Tax in terms of Rule 6 of STR, 1994 - In any event, it is evident that assessee paid the tax and there may be some procedural lapses for which the demand of tax is not sustainable in eyes of law - Regarding imposition of penalty, observation of Adjudicating Authority against assessee that they defrauded the exchequer is extremely shocking and Adjudicating Authority should avoid such language in their orders - So, no material found for imposition of penalty and therefore, imposition of penalties are waived under Section 80 of FA, 1994 - Adjudicating Authority is directed to verify the payment of tax by book adjustment and to pass order accordingly - The penalties are set aside: CESTAT - Appeal disposed of: KOLKATA CESTAT

Cus - Assessee is related to foreign supplier and is in the business of regularly importing goods which are in the nature of spare parts - The foreign supplier extends discounts ranging from 12% to 30% to assessee in India - The dispute is with reference to these discounts offered - In impugned order, it has been held that the assessee is entitled to such discounts and the transaction value may be accepted without loading to the extent of such discounts - Assessee has justified the discounts being offered to them by claiming that being the sole distributor of products by foreign principals in India, they undertake the activity of after sales service, administration and marketing - In this process, they undertake various types of risks such as risk of obsolescence, foreign exchange risk, training cost of engineers, coverage of warranty - Other importers, who import much smaller quantities for self-use do not provide such services and hence do not get such discounts - The lower authority has allowed such discounts mainly by taking the view that the quantum of imports made by assessee justify the same to be categorized as a separate class of buyers - Order passed by Commissioner(A) is reasonable - He has given detailed reasons justifying the grant of discounts: CESTAT - Appeal dismissed: KOLKATA CESTAT