2019 (8) TMI 1544

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssessee is engaged in manufacture of MS Ingots and bars falling under Chapter 72 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. It has been the contention of the Department that the respondent/assessee has not paid central excise duty on the additional consideration of sales tax collected by them from the buyers and retained by them to the extent of sales tax liability not actually paid to the State Exchequer. The Department noticed that the respondent/assessee had received investment subsidy in the form of VAT-37B entitlement certificate sanctioned to them by Rajasthan Government under Rajasthan Investment Promotion Policy (RIPP), 2003. Under RIPP, the Government had issued these VAT-37B challans to the respondent/assessee w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2018 dated 05 April 2018. The order dated 20 December 2018 of the Commissioner (Appeals) has been reviewed by the Department. They are before us against the above-mentioned order-in-appeal. 4. The grounds taken up for challenging the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) are same as being mentioned in the preceding paras of this order. 5. After hearing the learned Departmental Representative, we find that the matter is no longer res-integra as the issue has already been decided by this Tribunal in the case of Shree Cement Limited. The relevant extract of the above decision is reproduced here below :- "4. After hearing both sides and on perusal of record, it appears that the identical issue has already come up before the Tribun....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... actually paid to the good, 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 assessee 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 present case we know that for the initial period the assessees are required to remit the VAT recovered by them at the time of sale of the goods manufactured. A part of such VAT is given back to ....