2018 (6) TMI 1349 - AT - Central Excise

Valuation - inclusion of VAT subsidy amount (in the form of Vat-37 B challans which can be utilized for subsequent period for discharge VAT) for arriving at the assessable value - Section 4 of the Central Excise Act 1944 - Held that - The issue is covered by the decision in the case of GREENLAM INDUSTRIES LTD 2018 (4) TMI 1552 - CESTAT NEW DELHI where it was held 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 involved:
Inclusion of VAT subsidy amount in assessable value under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against the Order-in-Appeal concerning the inclusion of VAT subsidy amount in the assessable value under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Revenue had included the subsidy amount in the value of goods cleared by the appellant, leading to a demand for differential duty. The main contention was whether such subsidy amounts, received in the form of VAT 37 B challans, should be considered in the assessable value. The Tribunal referred to a previous order and observed that the subsidy received by the appellant was related to the VAT liability discharged by them, and a portion of the VAT was disbursed back to them in the form of subsidies. The Tribunal noted that the subsidy received through VAT 37 B challans was considered legal payments of tax under the Rajasthan government scheme. The Tribunal also highlighted the distinction made in a previous case where subsidy amounts were not required to be included in the transaction value. Based on these considerations, the Tribunal concluded that there was no justification for including the VAT amounts paid using VAT 37 B challans in the assessable value.

The Tribunal referred to a previous decision involving a similar issue and noted that the Apex Court had held that unless sales tax/VAT is actually paid to the government, no benefit towards excise duty can be given. However, the Tribunal distinguished this decision in light of the Gujarat VAT Act, 2003, where subsidy amounts were not required to be included in the transaction value. The Tribunal emphasized that the subsidy received by the appellant was directly related to the VAT liability discharged by them and was considered legal payments of tax under the Rajasthan government scheme. By following the decision in a previous case, the Tribunal concluded that there was no justification for including the VAT amounts paid using VAT 37 B challans in the assessable value.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal in terms of the earlier Final Order and set aside the impugned orders, thereby ruling in favor of the appellant regarding the inclusion of VAT subsidy amount in the assessable value under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944.