9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 857X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . This fact was not seriously disputed by the Commissioner (Appeals). Thus, it has been settled that the appellant is entitled to utilize the credit which was carried forward as on 09.07.2004 and it was also settled that the transfer of credit from the silvassa unit to surat unit is correct and legal - since both the issue have been settled in favour of the appellant, the demand in the present impugned orders shall not sustain. Appeal allowed. - Excise Appeal No. 12008 of 2016 WITH Excise Appeal No. 12009 of 2016 - Final Order No. A/11306-1307/2022 - Dated:- 20-10-2022 - MR. RAMESH NAIR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri Mukund Chauhan, Advocate appeared for the Applicant Shri G.Kirupanandan, Superintendent (AR) for the Respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant at the outset submits that both the issue raised in the Show cause notice has been settled by this Tribunal in the following decision of this Tribunal in the appellant s own case . Final Order No A/10195/2015 dated 04.02.2015 Final Order No. A/10867-10868/2019 dated 10.05.2019 Final Order No. A/11415/2018 dated 12.07.2018 2.1 Referring to above decisions he submits that both the issue on the basis of which the demand was confirmed have been settled by this Tribunal in the above decision. Hence he prays that following the above orders these appeals may be allowed. 3. Shri Vijay G Iyengar, Learned Superintendent (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the finding of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nterest and impose penalty on the ground that the credit itself was not admissible for the twp reasons. Firstly, the availment of credit on transfer of plant from Silvasa to Surat was not proper. The demand for transfer of credit from Silvasa to Surat is already settled and this Tribunal has remanded the matter to original adjudicating authority vide order dated 12.07.2018. In these circumstances, raising the demand on the same ground again is not legal and proper. The second issue relates to allegation that the credit in balance at the time of availing exemption notification 30/2004-CE would lapse on the basis of subrule (3) of Rule 11 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The said Rule reads as follow:- (3) A manufacturer or producer of a fin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /2018 dated 12.07.2018 4. We have carefully considered the submission made by both sides and perused the records. We find that the facts of the case is that the appellant factory of Silvassa Unit has been shifted to Surat Unit, they had an accumulated utilized Cenvat credit in their Cenvat account which is permissible to be transferred to the transferee unit in terms of Rule 10 of CCR, 2004, which reads as under:- (l) If a manufacturer of the final products shifts his factory to another site or the factory is transferred on account of change in ownership or on account of sale, merger, amalgamation, lease or transfer of the factory to a joint venture with the specific provision for transfer of liabilities of such factory, then, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant has violated any condition for transfer of the credit from the transferor unit. Moreover, it is observed that the appellant vide their letter dated 09.11.2012 and 10.12.20112 intimated to the Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner of Silvassa as well as Surat regarding the transfer of factory including plant machinery, stock of raw-material and transfer of unutilized credit. The Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner should have satisfied himself about the correctness of the transfer of credit on the basis of Cenvat account of both the Units. Without doing, merely on assumption basis allegation made against the appellant is not tenable. However, we find that the Adjudicating Authority denied the credit transferred from Silvassa t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
