9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (7) TMI 519 - AT - Central ExciseValuation - inclusion of VAT / CST subsidy in assessable value - Held that - The issue decided in the case of M/S. UNIVERSAL CABLES LTD. APPELLANT VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF GST, CENTRAL EXCISE, CUSTOMS, JABALPUR 2018 (3) TMI 1229 - 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.
Issues: Appeal against confirmation of duty demand on subsidy value and penalty under Section 78.
Analysis: The appeal was filed challenging the order confirming duty demand on the subsidy value received by the Appellant from 2010-11 to 2014-15, along with a penalty under Section 78. The Appellant, a manufacturer of Corrugated Boxes availing Cenvat Credit on inputs, was alleged to have availed VAT/CST subsidy without paying Central Excise duty on it. The Show Cause Notice issued by the Department led to the confirmation of the demand in an order dated 30.03.2017, which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the order under challenge dated 15.01.2018. During the hearing, Ms. Priyanka Goel represented the Appellant, while Sh. R.K. Mishra appeared for the Department. It was noted that a similar matter had been decided by the Tribunal in the case of M/s Shriji Polymers I. Ltd. & others vs. CCE&ST, Indore in Appeal No. E/50813-50815/2018 [Final Order No. 51741-51743/2018 dated 09.05.2018]. Referring to the case of M/s Pioneer Engineer Industries vs. CCE, Indore, 2018 (3) TMI 1229 – Cestat, New Delhi, and following the decisions in both cases, the Tribunal set aside the order under challenge. The decision was dictated in open court on 01.06.2018. In conclusion, the Tribunal, after considering relevant precedents, overturned the order confirming the duty demand on the subsidy value received by the Appellant and the penalty under Section 78. The decision was based on the application of legal principles established in previous cases, leading to the setting aside of the order under challenge.
|
