Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2014 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (4) TMI 93 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT Credit - Whether the excess credit lying in the books of accounts of the appellant can be transferred when the factory is shifted from one site to another, even if inputs or capital goods are not available for shifting or only part of the inputs or capital goods are available for shifting - Held that:- Rule 10 of the CCR, 2004 envisages that when a factory transferred from one site to another, the credit lying the books of accounts can be transferred. Sub-rule (3) further stipulates that, if any inputs and capital goods are lying, then they should also be transferred to the new site. The said Rule, nowhere stipulates that the credit that can be transferred should be attributable to the inputs or capital goods that are transferred. Even if excess credit is available in the books or accounts, the same can be transferred. Therefore, there is no bar imposed under sub-rule (3) of Rule 10 of CCR, 2004 in transferring excess credit available in the books of accounts which is more than those attributable to the inputs and capital goods lying in stock - appellant has made out a strong case for grant of stay - Following decision of Ispat Industries Ltd. [2013 (7) TMI 308 - CESTAT MUMBAI] and CCE, Pondicherry [2008 (7) TMI 116 - HIGH COURT MADRAS]- Stay granted.
|