9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 293X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The appellant is in appeal along with application for stay against the impugned orders. 2. After hearing both the sides, we find that appeal itself can be disposed of at this stage. Therefore, after waiving the requirement of pre-deposit, the matter is taken up for final disposal with the consent of both sides. 3. The brief facts of the case are that initially appellant was a 100% EOU, which was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penalty. Aggrieved from the said orders, appellants are before us. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that issue is no more res integra in the light of decision of Tribunal in the case of Ispat Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad reported in - 2013-TIOL-565-CESTAT-MUM., wherein this Tribunal has observed as under:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ods has not been transferred alongwith inputs. It is pertinent that Rule 10(3) uses the expression "inputs or capital goods" and "not inputs and capital goods" as has been contended by the department. The appellants have transferred all duty paid inputs and work in progress to their Dolvi unit as already discussed. Further, if an assessee has to transfer inputs corresponding to the transfer of ent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. CESTAT reported in 2008 (230) E.L.T. 209 (Mad.) on the same issue wherein the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed by the Hon'ble High Court and the said view has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in 2009 (237) E.L.T. A48 (S.C.) 5. Considering the submissions made by the Ld. Counsel by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
