9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 637X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sputedly they have become non-functional with effect from 10.4.2012. Thus they have ceased to be manufacturer of cars with effect from 10.4.2012 due to closure of unit / surrender of Central Excise registration - A similar situation was analyzed by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Union of India Vs. Slovak India Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. [2006 (7) TMI 9 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT], where the refund claim was allowed. The appellant is eligible for refund of the balance CENVAT credit when the appellant ceases to be a manufacturer due to closure of factory - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... whole of the assets were transferred to M/s. RNAIPL and the appellant has retained only the liabilities. In para 11 of the adjudication order, the adjudicating authority has noted that the appellant has removed all the assets / capital goods, duty paid inputs, semi-finished goods, finished products after payment of duty to M/s. RNAIPL, as per the business change agreement. The department vide letter dated 30.5.2016 had called for a list of assets as per the agreement which was later furnished by the appellant. The refund claim has been rejected by the authorities below observing that the appellant ought to have chosen to transfer the CENVAT credit also under Rule 10 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. As per the terms and conditions of the busin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai - 2016 (6) TMI 673 (c) Delta Power Solution India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Puducherry - 2017 (3) TMI 849 4. The ld. AR Shri K.P. Muralidharan supported the findings in the impugned order. He adverted to Rule 10 of CCR, 2004 and submitted that the appellant ought to have transferred the balance CENVAT credit to M/s. RNAIPL who has purchased the machinery and inventory from them. The said unit would thus be able to utilize the CENVAT credit. There is no provision in the law to refund the CENVAT credit in cases of closure of factory. Therefore, the authorities below have rightly rejected the claim. 5. Heard both sides. 6. It is correct that Rule 10 provides for transfer of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ucts cleared for export, the CENVAT credit in respect of the inputs so used shall be allowed to be utilized by the manufacturer towards payment of duty of excise on any final products cleared for home consumption or for export on payment of duty and where for any reason such adjustment is not possible, the manufacturer shall be allowed refund of such amount subject to such safeguards, conditions and limitations as may be specified by the Central Government by notification : Provided that no refund of credit shall be allowed if the manufacturer avails of drawback allowed under the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995, or claims a rebate of duty under the Central Excise Rules, 2002, in respect of such duty." 5. There is no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation. No notification of the Central Government setting out safeguards, conditions and limitations for the refund, in case of closure of the unit has been placed on record either before the Appellate Authority, the further Appellate Authority, the Tribunal or even before us. In the aforesaid circumstances, no substantial question of law arises for consideration in this appeal and it is accordingly dismissed at the stage of admission. No costs." 6.3 The Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in the case of Rama Industries Ltd. (supra), observed as under:- "We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the paper book with their able assistance. The matter is covered against the revenue by the Division Bench judgment of Ka ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
