9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (12) TMI 126X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted the plant or factory to another factory belonging to them. There is difference between the word 'site' and 'factory'. But the appellants arguments are for eliminating this substantial difference between 'site' and 'factory'. It is obvious that their arguments are not correct and tenable since 'site' cannot be equated with the factory. In view of the above, I, therefore, find no merits in the appellants' contentions warranting any interference with adjudication order in this case. The appeal is, therefore, rejected". 2.In the Order-in-Original the Asstt. Collector had held — "Here it is true that both the plants belong to the same manufacturer being same partners but Rule 57F(6) allows transfer of unutilised credit balance on account ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cking station at Madras. Packing station at Bangalore took Modvat credit of differential duty amounting to Rs. 18,34,599/- on the strength of the certificate issued by the Jurisdictional Supdt. on 29-8-94. The appellants applied for transferring of the credit of Rs. 18,35,018.73 inasmuch as in addition to Rs. 18,34,599/- an additional credit of Rs. 419.73 was lying in balance in R.G. 23A Part I at Bangalore packing station on the date of its closure. This request was made in terms of Rule 57F(7) of the Central Excise Rules. In the alternative, it was requested that cash refund as admissible under Rule 57E of the Central Excise Rules may be allowed. This request was turned down. Central Excise Registration Certificate at Bangalore was surren ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in stock is a benevolent provision; that it has been introduced to provide for the transfer of inputs without payment of duty; that when the transfer of credit is permitted in different situations like sale, merger, etc., this provision was enacted to get over the statutory condition of payment of duty when there is a clearance of the inputs which would take place in the case of shifting of the factory from one site to another. It was argued by the ld. Counsel that the interpretation placed by the Revenue that the quantum of credit that could be transferred would be restricted to the quantity of inputs lying in stock was incorrect inasmuch as there is no one to one correlation between the utilisation of inputs; that credit could be utilise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ort of his contention the ld. Counsel cited and relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mittal Engineering Works Ltd. v. CCE reported in 1996 (88) E.L.T. 622. He, therefore, submits that the decision in the case of N.K. Cnemical Industries is distinguishable. 7.Ld. Counsel also submitted that the appellant is entitled to refund of Modvat credit under Rule 57E; that this rule is a self-contained code by itself. In support of his contention he cited and relied upon the decision of the Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Utkal Asbestos Ltd. v. CCE reported in 2000 (120) E.L.T. 235 (T-LB) = 2000 (38) RLT 573. He submitted that if in their case adjustment in the credit account is not possible. Therefore, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tilised on account of shifting of the plant, or the factory; that in this case the unutilised credit lying in the account of form R.G. 23A has already been transferred and hence there is no question of allowing transfer of any credit once again. First of all transfer of credit is already effected; secondly there is no other provision in Modvat rules to allow transfer of such credit; that same reasoning also applied to credit taken in RG 23A part II account on the strength of the certificate issued in terms of Rule 57E. Ld. DR submits that in the instant case Bangalore packing station closed its operations in June '94 whereas credit was taken on 29-8-94. He submits that this shows that there was no credit of this amount lying in the account ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns of Rule 57F(7) as it was in June, 1994. Rule 57F(7) provides that the Commissioner may permit a manufacturer having credit in his account in form RG 23A and lying unutilised on account of change in ownership or change in the site of the factory resulting from sale, merger, amalgamation or transfer to a joint venture, etc. Thus, this credit should be lying unutilised in the books on account of change in the site of the factory. In the instant case the operations closed down in June, 1994. Records placed before us showed that whatever credit was lying unutilised in form RG 23A was permitted to be transferred. In the instant case credit of differential duty was taken on 29-8-94 which is subsequent to the date when the Bangalore factory clos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
