2018 (7) TMI 6 - AT - Central Excise

Valuation - inclusion of VAT in assessable value - Revenue was of the view that VAT liability discharged by the utilisation of the investment subsidy granted in Form 37B actually paid, for the purpose of Section 4 of the Central Excise Act - Held that - Identical issue decided in the case of Shree Cements Ltd. V/s CCE, Alwar 2018 (1) TMI 915 - 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:
1. Interpretation of whether subsidy amounts need to be included in the assessable value of goods under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act.
2. Determination of whether VAT liability discharged using subsidy challans can be considered as VAT actually paid.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Interpretation of Subsidy Inclusion in Assessable Value
The case involved an appeal against an Order-in-Appeal dated 02.02.2018, where the appellant, operating under the Rajasthan Investment Promotion Scheme, was required to deposit VAT/CST/SGST and entitled to subsidies disbursed in Form 37B. The Revenue contended that subsidy amounts should be included in the value of goods cleared by the appellant for excise duty calculation. The Tribunal referenced a similar case involving Shree Cements Ltd., highlighting the dispute over whether such subsidies should be part of the assessable value under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act. The Tribunal analyzed the concept of transaction value and the requirement for actual payment of VAT for excise duty benefits post-01/07/2000, citing relevant judicial precedents.

Issue 2: VAT Liability Discharged Using Subsidy Challans
The Tribunal deliberated on whether VAT liability discharged through subsidy challans, which were considered legal payments of tax under the Rajasthan Government scheme, should be treated as VAT actually paid. Referring to the decision in the Welspun Corporation Ltd. case, where subsidies were not included in the transaction value, the Tribunal concluded that VAT amounts paid using VAT 37B Challans should not be included in the assessable value. The Tribunal emphasized the legality of utilizing such challans for VAT payment in subsequent periods, rejecting the Revenue's argument that such payments did not constitute actual VAT payment.

In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders, allowing the appeal and providing consequential relief based on the analysis of the legal provisions, judicial precedents, and the specific scheme under which the appellant operated. The judgment clarified the treatment of subsidies in the context of VAT liability and assessable value determination under the Central Excise Act, providing guidance for similar cases involving investment promotion schemes and subsidy disbursements.