TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 357
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g recovery of cenvat of Rs.19,10,612/- for the period August 2008 to May, 2013, along with interest and penalty. The second SCN was issued on 16.09.2014 for the period October, 2013 to July, 2014 demanding Excise Duty of Rs.5,55,650/-. It was alleged in the SCNs that the Appellant have evaded payment of central excise duty by way on non-inclusion of the amount of VAT/Sales Tax collected and retained by them in the assessable value in violation of Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The said notices were adjudicated and the Ld. adjudicating authority, wherein he has confirmed the demands of Central excise duty along with interest and penalty demanded in the Notice. On appeal, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the demands vide the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e, such subsidy cannot be taken as additional benefit being received by the appellant so as to add the value of remission to the Assessable Value, as has been erroneously done by the lower authorities. 3.2. In support of their contention, the appellant relied on the following case laws : (i) 2017 (358) E.L.T. 630 (Tri. - Mumbai) COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., MUMBAI-I Vs WELSPUN CORPORATION LTD. 2019 (366) E.L.T. 900 (Tri. - Del.) (ii) SHREE CEMENT LTD. Vs CCE Alwar 2019 (370) E.L.T. 970 (Tri. - Delhi.) SELECT POLY PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. Vs CCE Jaipur Excise Appeal No.76498 of 2016 3.3. The submission of the appellant is that in all these cases, it has been held that the VAT incentive is not includible in the Assessable Value. Accordingly, he pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....issue was considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cited case of Commnr. Of Central Excise, Jaipur vs M/S. Super Synotex (India) Ltd. & Ors - 2014 (301) ELT 273 (SC) wherein it has been held as under : "4. The Commissioner of Excise repelled the stand of the assessee, interpreted the benefit granted to the assessee as partial exemption and, taking certain other facts into consideration, came to hold that the assessee had deliberately with an intent to evade payment of duty had suppressed the fact that though it was availing partial sales tax exemption under the Sales Tax Incentive Scheme of 1989 for the relevant period upto 75% of tax liability, yet it was paying only 25% of the tax leviable despite collecting additional considerati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve that the issue is no more res integra as the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Super Synotex (India) Ltd.Vs CCE, Jaipur reported in 2014 (301) ELT273, has held that the sales tax concession retained by the assesses is required to be added in the assessable value for the purpose of levy of Central Excise duty. " 8. By relying on the above decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, we hold that the sales tax concession retained by the Appellant is required to be added in the assessable value for the purpose of levy of Central Excise duty. 9. On the other hand, we find that the case laws cited by the appellant have either not considered the judgement of the Supreme Court cited supra, or were dealing the issue wherein the VAT challans were ....