Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (2) TMI 1073 - CESTAT CHANDIGARHCENVAT credit - transfer of credit - denial on the ground that Credit availed on the capital Goods at their new factory premises, however, the capital goods continued to be remain in the old factory premises - Rule 10 of the CCR 2004 - Held that: - as per the provisions of the 10(1), the transfer of Cenvat credit is available only if the manufacturer shifts his factory to another site - However, the appellant have themselves stated that they have continued manufacturing activity at old premises, solely for them; that the old premises was engaged in doing jobs works for the new premises. In this context the appellant plea regarding shifting of their factory to the new premises is not acceptable as manufacturing activity is carried out independently at both the premises - denial of credit justified. CENVAT credit - Input Services - maintenance of Wind Mills outside the factory premises - Held that: - the issue has been settled by the Larger, Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Parry Engg & Electronics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE & ST, Ahmedabad-I, II &III [2016 (1) TMI 546 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD], where it was held that credit is eligible on maintenance or repair services of Windmills, located away from the factory - credit allowed. Penalty u/r 15 read with Sec. 11AC is accordingly, reduced to the extent of inadmissible of Cenvat Credit on Capital goods - benefit of discharging 25% of the penalty is extended to the appellant subject to the fulfilment of conditions laid down under the said provisions. Appeal disposed off - decided partly in favor of appellant.
|