2018 (10) TMI 757

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s 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 were eligible for subsidies. They were required to deposit VAT/CST/SGST at the applicable rate with the Government and in terms of the scheme notified, will be entitled to disbursement of subsidy by the appropriate authorities. The subsidy concerned is sanctioned and disbursed in form 37B and such challan in the form VAT 37B can be utilised for discharge of the VAT liability of the appellant for subsequent periods. Revenue was of the view that the VAT liability discharged by utilising the investment subsidy granted in form 37B cannot be considered as....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d in subsequent periods to discharge VAT liability. The crux of the dispute in the present case is whether such subsidy amounts are required to be included in the assessable value of the goods manufactured by the appellants, in terms of 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. 8. Both sides have 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 he....