TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (4) TMI 1645
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the appellant cleared the woven sacks by paying duty on Transaction value. 3. It is in the year 2004 that the Government of Madhya Pradesh notified a scheme for providing financial assistance to industry. This scheme was called "Madhya Pradesh Industrial Investment Promotion Assistance Scheme, 2004" (hereinafter referred to as 2004 Scheme). This Scheme provides for financial assistance to pre-existing registered unit for capacity expansion/ diversification/technical up-gradation and the relevant clauses 6.2 and 6.4 of the Scheme, as translated in English, are reproduced below :- "6.2 Fiscal incentives in the form of Industrial Investment Promotion Assistance for units having fixed capital investment of Rs. 1 crore to Rs. 10 crores shall be granted equivalent to 75% of the amount deposited as commercial tax and central sales tax (which does not include tax paid on purchase of raw materials). This assistance amount shall be deposited in the commercial tax account of next year. For this necessary provision shall be kept in budget. However total assistance shall not exceed as compared to investment made in fixed assets." Sr. No. Category of District Minim....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... or actually payable. In the case of the appellant, the State Government paid total incentive in installments amounting to Rs. 16,34,60,118/- towards the payment of VAT made by the appellant under the 2004 Scheme. However, the appellant had deposited only the balance amount of VAT left after/before payment made by the Government. In this way, the appellant had retained the VAT amount collected to the extent which has been paid back by the State Government. It was, therefore, stated that the amount of VAT refunded under 2004 Scheme and received by the appellant has to be included in the Transaction value for payment of excise duty in terms of Section 4 (3) (d) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 6. The appellant filed a reply to the show cause notice mentioning therein that the Transaction value would not include the amount of duty of excise, sales tax and other taxes, if any, actually paid or actually payable on such goods and the appellant had paid the full Commercial Tax and Central Sale Tax after adjustment of the Commercial Tax paid on raw materials without retaining any amount of assistance to be received in future. It was also contended that the decision of the Supreme Court ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of unit concerned. Such payment shall be made once in a year to concerned commercial tax office for the unit concerned. 22.2 Vide the sanctioned order no. 6164, dated 05/01/2013, order no. 4291, dated 12/12/2013, and order no. 3676, dated 06/09/2014 by MP Trade & Investment Facilitation Corporation Ltd., Bhopal for the year 2009-2010, 2010-11 and 2011-12 respectively, it was clearly mentioned at para 3 that the bankers cheque/demand draft towards the amount sanctioned through this order would be issued in favour of Commercial Tax Office, Circle-Rewa, District Rewa (M.P.) and this deposition would be treated as an advance tax deposited by Assistance Receiver for the particulars stated above. 22.3 It is observed that the amount sanctioned as incentive in their commercial tax account as advance tax were utilized by the Noticee for the payment of tax for the subsequent period. Even the Noticee has utilized the said amount sanctioned for the payment of tax for the subsequent years. Thus it is pertinent to mention here is that the amount of tax collected from the buyers by the Noticee for the current years were not paid into VAT account of Government but 75% was retain....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....amining a scheme under which only 25% of VAT was required to be deposited and the remaining 75% was to be retained by the assessee, whereas under the 2004 Scheme, the entire amount collected by the assessee was required to be deposited with the State authorities. 13. It would be pertinent to refer to the relevant portion of the decision of the Tribunal in Shree Cement Ltd. and it is as follows :- "7. We have heard both sides at length and perused the appeal record. As out lined above, the appellants are covered by the Investment Promotion Schemes of the Rajasthan Government. In terms of the various schemes of the Rajasthan Government, the appellants are required to discharge their VAT liability by making payment of the same. Out of such VAT credited to the Government, a certain portion is disbursed back to them in the form of subsidies. Such disbursement happens in the form of VAT 37 B, challan which can be utilized 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 Centra....