9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 905X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondent. [Order per : Mathew John, Member (T)]. - Appellants are manufacturers of automobile parts. They have manufacturing units in 9 different places situated in different states. Out of these 6 units were set up not later than 2005. Two units came up in 2006 and one unit came up in 2008. 2. In the budget of 2005-06 Finance Minister announced a scheme under which manufacturers having man ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee coming under LTU was that they could transfer the Cenvat credit accumulated at one factory, for utilization at any other factory which was not permissible if the units were registered separately. 5. The relevant notification setting up LTU in New Delhi was issued on 2-6-2008. The Chief Commissioner of Central Excise in charge of LTU, New Delhi sent a letter to the assessee accept ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the three which came up after March 2006. 9. Now the Revenue took a stand that their original consent form did not mention the three units that came up after March 2006 and hence all the transfers of Cenvat credit from the newly set up unit to older units are without authority of law and should be paid back. A Show Cause Notice issued for recovery of such credit amounting to Rs. 4,40,00,00 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... units which were given. Now the Revenue is trying to deny a substantial benefit for some flimsy reason. 11. Further the Counsel submits that this very same issue was agitated before the Bombay High Court and the Bombay High Court in the decision reported as Sharda Motor Industries v. UOI at 2011 (267) E.L.T. 634 (Bom.) decided that the procedural flow involved is a curable defect and credit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
