https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754399 CESTAT Chennai held that VAT liability on catalyst supplied by HMIL remains with HMIL, not the appellant who used it for further manufacturing. The tribunal ruled that notional duties unpaid by suppliers cannot be included in transaction value of finished goods under Central Excise Act, 1944, Section 4(3)(d), which excludes taxes from transaction value. Following SC precedent in Dai Ichi Karkaria case, the appellant had no role in HMIL's VAT non-payment and showed no intention to evade duty. Extended limitation period and penalty were deemed inapplicable. The impugned order was set aside, appeal allowed in appellant's favor. en-us Thu, 20 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Jun 2024 08:11:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754399 CESTAT Chennai held that VAT liability on catalyst supplied by HMIL remains with HMIL, not the appellant who used it for further manufacturing. The tribunal ruled that notional duties unpaid by suppliers cannot be included in transaction value of finished goods under Central Excise Act, 1944, Section 4(3)(d), which excludes taxes from transaction value. Following SC precedent in Dai Ichi Karkaria case, the appellant had no role in HMIL's VAT non-payment and showed no intention to evade duty. Extended limitation period and penalty were deemed inapplicable. The impugned order was set aside, appeal allowed in appellant's favor. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 20 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754399