TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 435X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvestment promotion scheme of the Rajasthan Government and in terms thereof they are required to discharge their VAT liability by making payment of the same. The VAT so credited to the Government, certain portion is disbursed as VAT to the appellant in the form of subsidies in form of VAT 37B challan which can then be utilised in the subsequent period towards discharge of VAT liability. The appellant has been following the said practice and therefore the present case is squarely covered by the decision of the SHREE CEMENT LTD. SHREE JAIPUR CEMENT LTD. VERSUS CCE, ALWAR [ 2018 (1) TMI 915 - CESTAT NEW DELHI ], wherein this Tribunal has considered the same subsidy under Rajasthan Investment Promotion Scheme and relying on the earlier d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was held that discharge of liability by way of VAT 37B Challans has already been held as legally sustainable methodology of discharging tax liability for subsequent period. It is held that, in the given circumstances, Department was not entitled to invoke the extended period of limitation. The demand could be confined only to the normal period of one year. The impugned orders are unsustainable - Appeal allowed. - Excise Appeal No. 52473 of 2023-SM and Excise Appeal No. 52475 of 2023-SM - FINAL ORDER Nos. 50618 – 50619/2023 - Dated:- 8-5-2023 - MS. BINU TAMTA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Sh. Ajay K. Mishra, Advocate for the appellant Ms. Tamanna Alam, Authorised Representative for the respondent ORDER The appellant herein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Shree Cement Ltd., vs. CCE Final Order No. 50189 -50191/2018 dated 18.01.2018 was not complied with as the Department had challenged the said order before the Hon ble Supreme Court and appeal was admitted. Being aggrieved, the appellant has filed the present appeals before the Tribunal. 4. I have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and also the learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue and have perused the case law cited and also the records of the present case. 5. The learned Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the subsidy received by them from the Government of Rajasthan does not constitute any consideration for the purpose of levy of excise duty and in support thereof h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no justification for inclusion in the assessable value, the VAT amounts paid by the assessee using VAT 37B challans. The Tribunal quoted the observations in case of Welspun Corporation Ltd., which reads as under:- 5.1 The Respondent company opted for Remission of Tax Scheme and was thus eligible for the Capital subsidy in the form of remission of Sales Tax subject to the conditions to be fulfilled.....The subsidy in the form of remission of sales tax was in fact a percentage of capital investment... Separate assessment orders were thus issued by the assessing officer of the sales tax department from time to time towards the incentive scheme amount. The Competent Authority was required to necessarily pass order for remission of such t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant and therefore the issue of extended period of limitation does not require any decision thereon. I also find that the issue whether the subsidy amount was includible in the transaction value in terms of Section 4(3)(d) of the Central Excise Act was a matter of interpretation of law and therefore the allegation of suppression of fact are not applicable in the present case and consequently neither interest nor penalty is leviable. The allegation of mis-representation with reference to the inclusion of the subsidy amount under the instant scheme have been considered by the Tribunal in Select Poly Products Pvt. Ltd., (supra) and also in Honda Motorcycle and Scooters India Pvt. Ltd., (supra). The relevant paragraph is quoted below:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
