2018 (2) TMI 1240

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..../2014. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants have their factories situated in the State of Rajasthan and were operating under Rajasthan Investment Promotion Scheme which was notified by Government of Rajasthan with the objective of facilitating investment in the establishment of new enterprises. Under the various schemes of the Rajasthan Government, the appellant (assessee) were eligible for subsidies. As per the various schemes, the appellants were required to deposit VAT/CST/SGST at the applicable rate with the Government and in terms of the scheme notified, and will become entitled to disbursement of subsidy by the appropriate authorities. The subsidy concerned is sanctioned and disbursed in form 37B and such challan ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f Section 4 of the Central Excise Act. As per the concept of transaction value outlined in Section 4, with effect from 01/07/2000, any sales tax/VAT actually paid can be deducted from the transaction value for payment of excise duty. Revenue has taken the view that payment of VAT using 37B Challans cannot be considered as actual payment of VAT. 4. During the course of arguments, both sides have referred the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CCE, Jaipur - II vs. Super Synotex (India) Ltd. - 2014 (301) E.L.T. 273 (S.C.). In this case the Apex Court has categorically held that after 01/07/2000, unless the sales tax/VAT is actually paid to the good, no benefit towards excise duty can be given in terms of Section 4 (3) (d). However, w....