TMI Blog2007 (4) TMI 126X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dit on capital goods. The capital goods were leased out to another company. The Show Cause Notice demanded the credit availed on the goods leased out. However, in the Adjudication Order, the Commissioner dropped the demand on the ground that the capital goods remained where they were installed and had not been removed and cleared as such from the place where they were installed. He relied on the Tribunal ruling rendered in the case of Metzeller Automotive Profiles India P. Ltd. v. CCE, Ghaziabad - 2004 (167) E.L.T. 208 (Tri.-Del.) and Jamna Auto Industries Ltd. v. CCE, Indore - 2001 (130) E.L.T. 181 (Tri.-Del.). The Revenue has not accepted the finding/decision of the Commissioner. According to the Revenue, the capital goods ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctory to a joint venture with the specific provision for transfer of liabilities of such factory, then, the manufacturer shall be allowed to transfer the Cenvat credit lying unutilized in his accounts to such transferred, sold, merged, leased or amalgamated factory." In terms of the said Rule, there is a provision for transfer of the Cenvat credit lying unutilized to the transferee factory on account of lease. The learned Advocate contended that as far as the capital goods are concerned, they had al ready taken credit in respect of the duty on capital goods and there was nothing unutilized in their accounts to transfer the Cenvat credit to the lessee. It was also pointed out that Rule 3(4) is not relevant as there is actually no removal o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mbai - 2004 (170) E.L.T. 102 (Tri. Mumbai) wherein it has been held that interest has to be from the date of utilization of credit and not from the date of entry in the RG23A. (ii) CCE, Kolkata-III v. International Ferrites Ltd. - 2004 (163) E.L.T. 117 (Tri.-Kolkata) wherein it is held that interest cannot be charged when there is no financial accommodation. (iii) Page Apparels Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Bangalore - 2007 (208) E.L.T. 108 (Tri. Bang.) wherein this Bench, has held that when the credit had not been utilized, the demand of interest and imposition of penalty are not justified. 5.1 Following the ratio of the above decisions, we set aside the penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/- and also the demand of interest. In the Revenue's appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
