TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (12) TMI 1681
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eir other unit M/s ISMT Limited, MIDC Area, Baramati Taluka (herein referred together as 'the appellants' for short) assailing Order-in-Original No. PUN-EXCUS-003-COM-003-14-15 and Order-in- Original No. PUN-EXCUS-003-COM-004-14-15, both dated 21.05.2014 (referred together, as 'the impugned orders') passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Pune-III Commissionerate, Pune. 2. The miscellaneous application has been filed by the appellants seeking for submission of additional grounds in respect of the details furnished regarding their annual instalments amount paid to the State Sales Tax authorities under the Net Present Value Deferred Sales Tax incentive scheme, in order to state that part of the demand is incorrectly con....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....purchasers and pay the same to the Government of Maharashtra on the expiry of a deferred period. The appellants were one of the eligible units and granted the benefits of PSI vide Certificate No. JD/PNE/1988/DEFERRAL/EC-2794/C.P.- 24 dated 02.01.2007 in respect of Jejuri unit; and Certificate No. JD/PNE/ 1988/DEFERRAL/EC-30704/C.P.-25 dated 02.01.2007 for the Baramati unit. Under the said scheme, the eligible unit was permitted to charge sales tax for the sale of the goods and the amount of sales tax so collected was permitted to be retained by the appellants, subject to such sales tax amount should be paid in 5 equal yearly instalments on expiry of the 10th year, as computed from the last date of filing sales tax return. 3.4 Subsequentl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....termination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000. On the basis of such understanding, show cause proceedings were initiated by the department, seeking for recovery of the Central Excise duty of Rs.98,04,127/- in respect of Baramati unit and Rs.2,52,03,820/- in respect of Jejuri unit of the appellants, under Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 along with interest and also proposed for imposition of penalty on the appellants under Section 11AC ibid. The show cause notices (SCNs) issued in this regard were adjudicated vide aforesaid two Orders-in-Original both dated 21.05.2014 wherein all the proposals made in the SCNs were confirmed. Feeling aggrieved with the impugned orders, the appellants have preferred these appeals before ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted and given below: 11. This issue was considered in favour of the appellant in the interim order dated 21-3-2023 passed in M/s. Harit Polytech Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner, Central Excise and CGST-Jaipur [Excise Appeal No. 51011 of 2019, decided on 21-3-2023]/(2023) 13 Centax 264 (Tri. - Delhi)/[2023] 157 taxmann.com 620 (New Delhi) on a difference of opinion having arisen between two learned Members of the Division Bench of the Tribunal. The relevant portions of the order are as follows: "20. Under the promotion policy involved in these appeals, the subsidy does not reduce the sales tax that is required to be paid by the assessee. The entire amount of sales tax collected by the assessee from the customers is required to be paid. A ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0/- can be said to be an additional consideration. The decision of the Supreme Court in Super Synotex India would not be applicable to the facts of the present case as that was a case where 25% of the amount collected as sales tax from the customers was paid by the assessee and the remaining 75% of the amount was retained by the assessee, which amount was treated to be the price of the goods. In the promotion policy involved in the present case, the subsidy does not reduce the sales tax that is required to be paid by the assessee as the entire amount of sales tax collected by the assessee from the customer is paid. The subsidy amount, therefore, cannot be included in the transaction value for the purpose of levy of central excise duty under....