TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 520X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... RSUS M/S. FEATHERLITE PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. [ 2017 (6) TMI 814 - MADRAS HIGH COURT ]. The assessee in the said case had requested for transfer of assets, stocks as well as cenvat credit from Hosur unit to their unit at Bangalore, after closure of the factory situated at Hosur. The Hon ble High Court after considering the Rule 10 of CCR 2004 observed Thus, having regard to the purpose behind the rule, which is, broadly, to enable an assessee to use unutilised Cenvat credit, we see no difficulty in holding that an assessee will be able to transfer his unutilised Cenvat credit, even in a situation, where he shifts his factory from one site to another. The decision of Hon ble High Court of Madras in the case of M/s. Feartherlite Products ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... credit. Aggrieved by such order, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who upheld the rejection of request to transfer the unutilized cenvat credit to the Sriperumbudur unit. Against the said order, the appellant is before the Tribunal. 2. The Ld. Counsel Sri M.N. Bharathi appeared and argued for the appellant. The relevant Rule 10 of CCR 2004 was adverted to by the learned counsel which reads as under : RULE 10. Transfer of Cenvat credit. - (1) 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 f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ltd. 2017 (353) ELT 439 (Mad.) and held that the transfer of credit in the cases of closure of factory is permissible in terms of Rule 10 of CCR 2004. The said decision was followed by the Tribunal in the case of Tejas Networks Ltd. Vs Commissioner of GST Central Excise - 2022 (2) TMI CESTAT CHENNAI. So also, similar view was taken in the case of Super Spinning Mills Ltd. Vs CCE Coimbatore 2018 (7) TMI 779 CESTAT CHENNAI. It is prayed that the appeal may be allowed. 4. Ld. A.R Sri M. Ambe supported the findings in the impugned order. 5. Heard both sides. 6. The issue is whether the rejection of request of transfer of the unutilized credit in terms of Rule 10 of CCR 2004 in a situation of closure of factory is legal and prop ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bangalore unit. 14.1 Furthermore, as indicated in our narration, the entire original record was made available to the Adjudicating Authority for examination. 14.2 We have been shown the copy of the reply filed which details out the annexures appended thereto. A perusal of the same leaves no manner of doubt that information qua this aspect was supplied, which is why, perhaps, no objection was raised by the Adjudicating Authority in this regard. 14.3 Accordingly, for the reasons given above, the conclusions arrived at, by the Tribunal is sustained, albeit, for different reasons. Consequently, the question of law, as framed, is answered in favour of the respondent/assessee and against the appellant/Revenue 7. The very same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
