9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 616X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ule is duly complied with. The various credits undertaken by the appellant have been shown under ER-I Returns and the same amount has been taken as credit at the new location, which has been shown in return of the previous location - transfer of credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Excise Appeal No.50199/2017-DB - Final Order No.53454/2018 - Dated:- 30-11-2018 - MR. ANIL CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) And MR. BIJAY KUMAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri R.P. Singh, Advocate for the appellant. Shri R.K. Mishra, DR for the respondent. ORDER Per Bijay Kumar:- The appellant is aggrieved by the Order-in-Original No.ALW-EXCUS-O-I-O-COM-42/16-17 dated 15.09.2016, against which the present app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -section (1) of Section 11 AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 or sub-section (1) of Section 76 of the Finance Act (32 of 1994). The show cause notice was adjudicated by the ld. Commissioner, which resulted into confirmation of the demand vide impugned order. 4. Ld. Advocate on behalf of the appellant submitted that the Appellant have duly intimated the transfer of cenvat credit from their earlier unit at Delhi to the new unit at Alwar, Rajasthan, which was also accepted by the Department. Accordingly, no contravention of any rule for demand of cenvat credit has been committed by them as held in the impugned order. He relied on the following judgments to support his contention:- (i) CCE, Chennai-III Vs. Feaherlite Product Pvt. Ltd. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ovided with copies of ER-I Return for the month of April, May and June, 2014, which have been seen and taken due notice of. But Still he is of the opinion that the matter should be remanded to the Adjudicating Authority to verify these credit particulars, which were availed in the month of May, June, etc. 7. Against this background, we have heard ld. Advocate for the appellant and Ld. DR for the Revenue and perused their appeal records along with ER-I Return submitted to us in view of our direction on the previous date. To resolve the controversy, we feel it necessary to reproduce the provisions of Rule 10 of Credit Rules. 10. Transfer of CENVAT credit.- (1) If a manufacturer of the final products shifts his factory to another site ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is no mention of getting the permission of transfer from the previous location to the new location by the concerned Central Excise Authorities, which has been made a ground for confirming the penalty against the appellant. It is on record that the intimation has been filed to both the new and old jurisdiction by the appellant. Hence, the procedural requirement under Credit Rule is duly complied with. The Revenue s instance on remanding the matter for verification is uncalled for and we do not agree to that as the same will be not in conformity with Credit Rules and also cause undue hardship to the noticee. 10. Hence, we are satisfied that the various credits undertaken by the appellant have been shown under ER-I Returns and the same amou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
