2019 (7) TMI 1862 - AT - Central Excise

Valuation - inclusion of VAT subsidy amount for arriving at the assessable value - Section 4 of the Central Excise Act 1944 - HELD THAT - The issue is covered by the appellant own case 2018 (1) TMI 915 - CESTAT NEW DELHI that there is no justification for inclusion in the assessable value the VAT amounts paid by the assessee using VAT 37B Challans. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Inclusion of VAT subsidy amount in assessable value under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

Issue Analysis:

1. Inclusion of VAT Subsidy Amount:
The issue in this case revolves around the inclusion of VAT subsidy amount, received in the form of VAT-37 B challans, in the assessable value under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Revenue included the subsidy amount in the value of goods cleared by the appellant, leading to a demand for differential duty. The appellant challenged this inclusion through the present appeal, arguing against the Revenue's stance.

2. Judicial Precedents and Interpretation:
During the proceedings, both the appellant's advocate and the Departmental Representative referred to a Final Order of the Tribunal in a similar case involving the Investment Promotion Schemes of the Rajasthan Government. The Tribunal's decision highlighted the nature of the subsidy received by the appellants and its relation to VAT liability. The Tribunal analyzed the concept of transaction value under Section 4, emphasizing the actual payment of VAT for excise duty benefit post-2000. Reference was made to a Supreme Court decision and a Tribunal case to distinguish the treatment of subsidy amounts under different tax schemes.

3. Application of Precedents and Conclusion:
Based on the Tribunal's decision in a similar case involving the "Remission of Tax Scheme," it was concluded that there is no justification for including VAT amounts paid using VAT-37 B challans in the assessable value. The Tribunal found that the subsidy received was directly related to capital investment, subject to specific conditions, and was not akin to an exemption from tax payment. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, and the appeals were allowed, aligning with the earlier Tribunal decision on the matter.

In summary, the judgment delves into the interpretation of the Central Excise Act regarding the inclusion of VAT subsidy amounts in the assessable value, drawing insights from judicial precedents and specific tax schemes. The decision provides clarity on the treatment of such subsidies and upholds the appellant's position, emphasizing the legal distinction between tax payments and subsidy receipts in determining the assessable value under Section 4 of the Act.