Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2019 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (2) TMI 401 - AT - Central ExciseTransfer of credit - Rule 10 of CENVAT Credit Rules - merging of units - availment of credit on capital goods - Held that:- Undisputed facts are ESCL and ESIAD have merged together and formed merged ESCL and are given one registration number which would indicate that the unit was functioning out of one premises; that both the units unmerged ESCL and ESID, were operating/manufacturing. The merger of the both units was accepted by the authorities in the form of issuing a new registration certificate, there was no outward movement of inputs or capital goods from the premises of unmerged ESCL and ESID, as also from merged ESCL, would mean that all the inputs and the capital goods on which CENVAT credit was availed by the unmerged units were available in the premises. Rule 10 do not mandate for any separate written permission from jurisdictional authorities. The language of Rule 10(1) specifically states that manufacturer shall be allowed to transfer the CENVAT credit lying unutilized in his accounts to such transfer, sold, merged, leased or amalgamated factory. The Provisions of Rule 10(3) is also complied in this case as the stock of inputs as such or in process or capital goods are also to be transferred along with the factory premises, in the name of merged ESCL and there is due accounting in merged ESCL. Ineligible CENVAT credit availed on capital goods - 100% credit availed in subsequent year - Held that:- The appellant had not availed any CENVAT credit in the year of receipt of the capital goods and has availed CENVAT 100% in the subsequently after the factory was commissioned. The appellant has correctly availed the CENVAT credit on capital goods. There is no doubt as to the fact that the capital goods were received in the factory premises in ESIAD and they were installed and CENVAT credit was availed subsequent to the production activity - the impugned order to the extent it denies CENVAT credit on capital goods is also not in consonance with the law. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|