2001 (5) TMI 703

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t. Shri C.S. Lodha, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. - The following questions are posed for reference to the High Court : (i) Whether the balance of Modvat credit lying in RG 23A Part II could at all be allowed to be transferred by one manufacturer to another manufacturer in terms of sub-rule (6) of Rule 57F of the Rules as it stood then in the event of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ip of the factory by way of merger, amalgamation or other transaction involving takeover of the assets and liabilities of one manufacturer by another. Relying on four earlier decisions of the Tribunal in Sushripada Chemicals v. C.C.E. & C. - 1996 (88) E.L.T. 109, Ashapura Electricals Ltd. v. CCE - 1989 (42) E.L.T. 709, Saurashtra Chemicals v. CCE - 1998 (101) E.L.T. 379 and Universal Hydrocarbons .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... v. CCE - 1996 (81) E.L.T. 336 and others are cited in support of the second question, that filing the declaration under Rule 57G is not merely procedural but substantive. The situation on which these decisions were given is significantly different. In the case before it, the Tribunal found that the declaration under Rule 57G in fact had been filed by Sunrise Soaps & Chemicals Pvt. Ltd and said th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X