Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.34 seconds)Technocraft Industries (I) Ltd. vs Cce Thane I on 13 August, 2019
5. We have carefully considered the submissions advanced by both sides and
perused the records. The short point involved in the present appeal for consideration
is whether CENVAT Credit lying in balance in the books of account of 100% EOU as
on the date of de- bonding, could be transferred to the DTA unit. We find that the
issue has been considered by this Tribunal in series of judgments viz. Technocraft
Industries (India) Ltd Vs CCE (supra), Tecumseh Products India P.Ltd Vs
CC,CE&ST (supra), Hyderabad-IV, John Deere India Pvt. Ltd Vs CCE(supra), Pune-
III and CCE, Thane-I Vs Sequent Scientific Ltd(supra). It has been consistently held
by the Tribunal in all these cases that the CENVAT Credit lying in balance as on the
date of de-bonding of 100% EOU and conversion to DTA unit, could be transferred to
the DTA unit and be utilised by the said unit. Following the principle consistently laid
down by the Tribunal in aforesaid cases, we do not find merit in the impugned order,
which is contrary to the said precedents.
John Deere India Pvt Ltd vs Cce Pune Iii on 14 June, 2019
5. We have carefully considered the submissions advanced by both sides and
perused the records. The short point involved in the present appeal for consideration
is whether CENVAT Credit lying in balance in the books of account of 100% EOU as
on the date of de- bonding, could be transferred to the DTA unit. We find that the
issue has been considered by this Tribunal in series of judgments viz. Technocraft
Industries (India) Ltd Vs CCE (supra), Tecumseh Products India P.Ltd Vs
CC,CE&ST (supra), Hyderabad-IV, John Deere India Pvt. Ltd Vs CCE(supra), Pune-
III and CCE, Thane-I Vs Sequent Scientific Ltd(supra). It has been consistently held
by the Tribunal in all these cases that the CENVAT Credit lying in balance as on the
date of de-bonding of 100% EOU and conversion to DTA unit, could be transferred to
the DTA unit and be utilised by the said unit. Following the principle consistently laid
down by the Tribunal in aforesaid cases, we do not find merit in the impugned order,
which is contrary to the said precedents.
M/S. Tecumseh Products India Pvt. Ltd vs Cc&Ce, Hyderabad-Iv on 7 June, 2016
5. We have carefully considered the submissions advanced by both sides and
perused the records. The short point involved in the present appeal for consideration
is whether CENVAT Credit lying in balance in the books of account of 100% EOU as
on the date of de- bonding, could be transferred to the DTA unit. We find that the
issue has been considered by this Tribunal in series of judgments viz. Technocraft
Industries (India) Ltd Vs CCE (supra), Tecumseh Products India P.Ltd Vs
CC,CE&ST (supra), Hyderabad-IV, John Deere India Pvt. Ltd Vs CCE(supra), Pune-
III and CCE, Thane-I Vs Sequent Scientific Ltd(supra). It has been consistently held
by the Tribunal in all these cases that the CENVAT Credit lying in balance as on the
date of de-bonding of 100% EOU and conversion to DTA unit, could be transferred to
the DTA unit and be utilised by the said unit. Following the principle consistently laid
down by the Tribunal in aforesaid cases, we do not find merit in the impugned order,
which is contrary to the said precedents.
The Finance Act, 2018
Section 37 in The Central Excise Act, 1944 [Entire Act]
Hello Minerals Water (P) Ltd. vs Union Of India (Uoi) on 28 July, 2004
33. The appellant has reversed the credit and had sufficient balance during
the disputed period. The decision in the case of Hello Minerals Water (P)
Ltd., Vs. Union of India - 2004 (174) ELT 422 - Allahabad would squarely
apply.
Wipro Enterprises vs Commissioner Of Gst&Amp;Cce(Chennai ... on 19 December, 2018
20. The Learned Counsel submitted that since the EOU unit had already
debonded and NOC granted in 2011 itself, it had continued to function only
as a DTA unit. The debonded unit has taken credit of the duties paid at the
time of debonding as a DTA unit. Under such circumstances, the objection
raised by the audit, that there is no provision under Rule 10 for transfer of
credit from EOU unit to DTA unit is erroneous. The department has denied
the credit alleging that there are no documents as specified under Rule 9 of
CCR 2004 for availing the credit in the DTA unit. It is argued by the Learned
Counsel that when the credit is transferred, there is no requirement for any
documents except debits which should be made in Cenvat credit account of
the transferring unit. To support the arguments, the Learned Counsel relied
upon the decision in the case of the M/s. Wipro Ltd., Vs. Commissioner of
GST & CE, Chennai - 2023 (6) TMI 237 Cestat Chennai and M/s Super Auto
Forge Limited Vs Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Chennai 2023
(10) TMI 1086 - Cestat Chennai.
Super Auto Forge Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner Of Gst&Amp;Cce(Chennai ... on 9 October, 2018
20. The Learned Counsel submitted that since the EOU unit had already
debonded and NOC granted in 2011 itself, it had continued to function only
as a DTA unit. The debonded unit has taken credit of the duties paid at the
time of debonding as a DTA unit. Under such circumstances, the objection
raised by the audit, that there is no provision under Rule 10 for transfer of
credit from EOU unit to DTA unit is erroneous. The department has denied
the credit alleging that there are no documents as specified under Rule 9 of
CCR 2004 for availing the credit in the DTA unit. It is argued by the Learned
Counsel that when the credit is transferred, there is no requirement for any
documents except debits which should be made in Cenvat credit account of
the transferring unit. To support the arguments, the Learned Counsel relied
upon the decision in the case of the M/s. Wipro Ltd., Vs. Commissioner of
GST & CE, Chennai - 2023 (6) TMI 237 Cestat Chennai and M/s Super Auto
Forge Limited Vs Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Chennai 2023
(10) TMI 1086 - Cestat Chennai.
Wipro Acer Ltd vs Commissioner Of Gst&Amp;Central ... on 26 June, 2019
36. The appellant requested the department permission to merge the
debonded unit with the existing DTA unit as one common DTA unit. Though
several letters were sent to the department, there was no response.
Thereafter, the appellant merged both the units and transferred the
unutilized credit lying in the Cenvat account of the debonded EOU unit to the
merged DTA unit. Rule 10 of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004, provides for transfer
of credit from one DTA unit to another DTA unit. The department is of the
view that since the unit had availed the credit as EOU unit, even though it
has been debonded and become a DTA unit, the credit cannot be
transferred. The same issue has been analyzed and decided by the Tribunal
in the case of M/s Wipro Limited Vs Commissioner of GST and Central Excise
Chennai, 2023 (6) TMI 237 Cestat Chennai, wherein it was held that the
credit carried forward to the DTA unit after de-bonding cannot be denied.
The relevant part reads as under:-