TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 748X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. Tribunal Mumbai in the case of CCE, Mumbai Vs. M/s Welspun Corporation Ltd. [2017 (5) TMI 177 - CESTAT MUMBAI] has held that once the Sales Tax Department has assessed the sales tax as paid, the Central Excise Department cannot contend that since the State Government has remitted the amount back to the appellants as incentive, sales tax was not paid by them. After the assessment by the Sales Tax Department for sales tax to have been paid, condition of Section 4(3)(d) of Central Excise Act, 1944 stands fulfilled. There is a difference between remission and exemption. As while in case of exemption, the levy itself is statutorily exhausted and no sales tax is paid or payable by the assessee whereas in case of remission, the sales tax is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 19-EX[DB] - Dated:- 15-2-2019 - MR. BIJAY KUMAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) And MRS. RACHNA GUPTA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Present for the Appellant: Ms. Sukriti Das, Advocate Present for the Respondent: Mr. V.B. Jain, D.R. ORDER PER: RACHNA GUPTA Present is an appeal preferred against Order No.02 dated 08.05.2018. 2. The facts in brief relevant for the adjudication are that the appellant is engaged in manufacture of Scooter, Motor Cycle and the parts thereof. The Department observed that the appellants have not paid Central Excise duty on additional consideration of sales-tax collected from the buyers and retained by them to the extent of sales-tax liability not actually paid to the State Exchequer with intent to evade ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by State Government of Rajasthan with a view to promote investments thereby entitling the appellant to a subsidy up to certain percentage of the VAT paid by the appellant. It is an admitted fact that the said subsidy is credited to the sales tax account of the appellant which he receives by way of VAT 37B Challans. It is also an apparently admitted fact that the appellant was paying total VAT charged at applicable rates on sale of goods to the State Exchequer and was filing the VAT returns. The VAT 37B Challans, the appellant was utilising to discharge the output VAT liability for the subsequent period. The Department has treated the said discharge of VAT liability vide the said VAT Challans as retention of sales tax by the appellant holdin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and /or payment of sales tax at the time of clearance and the same has to be statutorily discharged. 8. In the present case, the remission is in the nature of subsidy which the appellant was receiving from the State Government in the form of VAT 37B Challans and not from the buyers of the appellant. The said remission was not only as good as cash but can also not be considered as an additional consideration. The definition of transaction value under Section 4(3)(d) of Central Excise Act becomes relevant at this stage which reads as follows:- Transaction value means the price actually paid or payable for the goods, when sold and includes in addition to the amount charged as price, any amount that the buyer is liable to pay to, or on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uch Challans are the legal payments of tax. 11. Though Department has given much emphasis upon Super Synotex (supra) but we are of the opinion that the facts of present case are absolutely different from the said case in the terms that the Hon ble Apex Court in the said case was dealing with sales tax incentive scheme. But in the present case, the issue is with respect to the grant of sales tax subsidy. In Super Synotex (supra) case, the assesse was retaining 75% of the sales tax collected from the customers whereas in the present case, the appellant had paid the entire amount of sales tax collected from the customers, with the Sales Tax Department without retaining even a meagre portion thereof. Hence, the benefit granted by RIPS to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
