Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
Subsidy received by the appellant under Rajasthan Investment Promotion Scheme 2010 from the State Government cannot be included in assessable value of goods cleared during 1.4.2016 to 31.03.2017 u/s 4(3)(d) of Central Excise Act. Following latest decision in M/S HARIT POLYTECH PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE & CGST- JAIPUR I and other cases, where subsidy does not reduce sales tax required to be paid by assessee, subsidy amount cannot be included in transaction value for central excise duty levy. VAT amount paid by assessee using VAT 37B challans construed as actual VAT payment, not included in transaction value u/s 4(3)(d). Impugned order set aside. Appeal allowed.
Subsidy received by the appellant under Rajasthan Investment Promotion Scheme 2010 from the State Government cannot be included in assessable value of goods cleared during 1.4.2016 to 31.03.2017 u/s 4(3)(d) of Central Excise Act. Following latest decision in M/S HARIT POLYTECH PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE & CGST- JAIPUR I and other cases, where subsidy does not reduce sales tax required to be paid by assessee, subsidy amount cannot be included in transaction value for central excise duty levy. VAT amount paid by assessee using VAT 37B challans construed as actual VAT payment, not included in transaction value u/s 4(3)(d). Impugned order set aside. Appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
