2018 (9) TMI 487

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al Excise duty under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1994. Accordingly, the Revenue proceeded to include such subsidy amount in the value of the goods cleared by the appellant and demanded the differential duty. Being aggrieved, the appellant has preferred the present appeal. 2. The ld. Advocate Shri Vivek Sharma, has brought before us many judgments including the one passed by this Tribunal wherein it has been held that same is not includable in the assessable value following the judgments of M/s Shree Cement Ltd vs. CCE Alwar 2018- TIOL-748-CESTAT-DELHI wherein it was observed that:- 3. Against this backdrop, we heard Ld. Advocate Shri Vivek Sharma, and Ld AR Smt. Tamana Alam. Both of them agree that the issue is covered by the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ave referred to the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Super Synotex India Ltd. In the above decision the Apex Court has categorically held that after 01/07/2000, unless the sales tax/VAT is actually paid to the govt., no benefit towards excise duty can be given in terms of Section 4(3)(d). However, we note that the Tribunal in the case of Welspun Corporation Ltd. (Supra) has distinguished the decision of the Apex Court in the light of Gujarat VAT Act, 2003. In the Welspun Corporation Ltd. case, the assesse had opted for remission of tax scheme under which a portion of the VAT paid was remitted back to the assessee. The Tribunal held that such subsidy amounts are not required to the included in the transaction value. 9. In the pre....