Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2011 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (4) TMI 344 - CESTAT, NEW DELHIApplicability - Provisions of Rule 3(5) or under provisions of Rule 10(3) - Appellant at the time of shifting their factory they had transferred capital goods on which Cenvat credit was taken - The Appellant did not clear the capital goods under provisions of Rule 3(5) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 by reversing applicable Cenvat credit - The Appellants have been contesting that they are entitled to transfer the capital goods from their factory at Faridabad to their factory at Roorkee under provisions of Rule 10(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - Held that:- no transfer of credit is possible at all because the factory at Roorkee was not operating under Cenvat Scheme - That being the case provisions of Rule 10(3) cannot be applied in this case - This Rule cannot be read as a provision enabling removal of capital goods from one factory of a manufacturer to another factory of the manufacturer - Therefore the correct rule applicable was Rule 3(5).
|