9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 287X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also seen the Tribunal's judgment in the case of Indira Gandhi Mahila Sahakari Soot Girni Ltd. (2011 (10) TMI 206 - CESTAT, MUMBAI), the facts of that case are entirely different and that case pertain to the time when the old rules were in existence, and therefore not applicable to the present facts of the case. On limitation also we find the appellant has strong case as when unit got converted in EOU all details of unutilised credit etc. were made known to the department and revenue after five years cannot allege that there was wilful mis-statement or suppression of fact. - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. E/89653/13-Mum - Final Order No. A/2448/2015-WZB/EB - Dated:- 28-7-2015 - P. K. Jain, Member (T) And S. S. Garg, Member ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ded period of limitation. He submitted that at the time of conversion itself the facts were known to the department and even in ER1 return the information was available and there is no justification whatsoever to invoke the extended period of limitation. He cites the following case laws in support of his contention. i) Sun Pharmaceuticals Inds. Ltd. vs. CCE 2010 (251) ELT 312 ii) Sandoz Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE -E/2303/2006 iii) CCE vs. Sandoz P. Ltd. 2013 (291) ELT 325 iv) Repro India Ltd. vs. UOI 2008 (088) RLT 481 v) Matrix Laboratories Ltd. vs. CCE - Appeal No.E/435/2009 vi) Kiran Pondy Chems Ltd. vs. CCE 2009 (239) ELT 192 vii) Solaris Bio-Chemicals Ltd. 2005 (179) ELT 0216 3. Ld. AR reiterates the various findings in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... envat Credit Rules, 2004. In the absence of any specific prohibition denying the transfer of credit, the appellants are rightly entitled to transfer of the same. The decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sandoz Pvt. Ltd., and of the Tribunal decision in the case of Watson Pharma Pvt. Ltd. (supra) confirm the above view. Accordingly, the appellant is entitled to transfer of credit lying in the books of accounts at the time of conversion from DTA to 100% EOU and therefore the impugned demands are not sustainable. Thus, the appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any. 6. In view of the above position, we do not find any merits in the contention of the Revenue. We also note that the Board Circular no. 77/99-Cu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
