2008 (9) TMI 329 - AT - Central Excise

Cenvat transfer of unit - whether the assessee is eligible for availing Cenvat credit on Inputs / Capital goods / Input services along with Education Cess lying unutilized in their books of accounts at their old factory premises on transfer of their unit to their new factory without transfer of any inputs, work-in-progress and Capital goods - The Commissioner (Appeals), after detailed examination, has noticed that there is no double benefit availed by the assesee and that they had reversed the credit with regard to the inputs and capital goods at the time of shifting and availed the same. Benefit of credit is allowed at new premises.

Summary

Issues:
1. Transfer of Cenvat credit on Inputs/Capital goods/Input service during shifting of premises.
2. Allegation of double utilization of benefits by the assessee.
3. Applicability of case laws in determining eligibility for Cenvat credit.

Issue 1: Transfer of Cenvat credit on Inputs/Capital goods/Input service during shifting of premises
The case involved a dispute where the Revenue challenged the Order-in-Appeal that allowed the assessee to avail Cenvat credit in respect of unutilized credit during the shifting of Capital Goods and inputs to a new premises. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the Order-in-Original, emphasizing that the assessee followed proper procedures for shifting inputs and capital goods to the new premises under Central Excise Rules 2004. The Commissioner found no irregularity in transferring the unutilized credit balance to the new premises after payment of duty, without requiring specific permission from the department. The Commissioner concluded that the assessee's actions were in compliance with the rules, and thus upheld the appeal.

Issue 2: Allegation of double utilization of benefits by the assessee
The Revenue contended that the assessee should not have availed Cenvat credit for unutilized credit before or after shifting inputs and Capital Goods to the new premises, alleging double utilization of benefits. Citing a previous case, the Revenue argued that utilizing the credit in the new factory before shifting inputs and Capital Goods was irregular. However, the Counsel for the assessee argued that denial of credit when there was no physical stock of inputs at the old premises upon shifting was unjustified. The Counsel relied on precedents to support the eligibility of transferring credits upon shifting units, provided proper accounting procedures were followed. The Tribunal noted that the facts presented in the Show Cause Notice were crucial, and after careful consideration, found no irregularity in the assessee's actions, rejecting the Revenue's appeal.

Issue 3: Applicability of case laws in determining eligibility for Cenvat credit
The Tribunal examined relevant case laws to determine the eligibility of the assessee for availing Cenvat credit during the shifting of premises. It was established that the unutilized credit in the books could be transferred even after goods were physically moved, subject to verification by concerned officers. The Tribunal emphasized that the assessee had followed proper procedures and reversed credits when necessary, without double utilization. Relying on previous judgments, the Tribunal concluded that the assessee's actions were in line with legal requirements, and there was no merit in the Revenue's appeal, which was subsequently rejected.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues raised, the arguments presented by both parties, and the Tribunal's reasoning in resolving the dispute regarding the transfer and utilization of Cenvat credit during the shifting of premises.