Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2017 (3) TMI 230

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ommissioner (AR) for the Respondent. ORDER The brief facts of case are that the appellants are engaged in production and manufacture of Hydrogen Peroxide. M/s Asian Peroxides Ltd., (APL) Plant no. 1 as well as Plant no.2 were both engaged in the production of Hydrogen Peroxide. As per the request of Plant no. 1 vide their letter dated 23.04.2008 permission was granted by the department, for the merger of Plant no.2 with Plant no. 1 with effect from 01.05.2008 and after merger the combined entity is known as M/s APL and has the Central Excise Registration No. AAACA6213GXM001. A show cause notice was issued to the appellant alleging that after merger of both plants, the CENVAT Credit account of ₹ 90,845/- as well as Personal Le .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d in taking the view that there is no provision in law for transferring the amount lying unutilized in PLA and that there cannot be any transfer of the PLA to the new entity. He explained that PLA is only account current which is maintained by the appellant for payment of duty. That after merger the balance lying in the PLA is to be transferred to the new entity and becomes part of the assets of the new unit. That therefore the PLA of the earlier unit (Plant No. 2) has to be merged and transferred to the new unit that has come into existence. The Ld. Counsel also explained that law provided specific provision in CENVAT Credit Rules for transfer of CENVAT Credit account for the reason that the invoices having been issued in the name of earli .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... onsidered as the cash held by the appellant company which definitely falls under the assets of the company. Viewing in this angle, when the assets of one unit merges with the other, the PLA necessarily has to follow. I cannot accept the argument of the Ld. AR that the appellant ought to have applied for refund of the balance lying in the PLA for the simple reason that then the question arises as to who has to apply for refund and who will get the refund. The earlier unit which was having the balance of PLA is no more in existence and cannot apply for such refund. The new unit that has come into existence cannot get the refund, since the amount in PLA if that be so, does not belong to it. In case of PSP Projects Pvt Ltd., vs CST, Ahmedabad .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates