https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170098 On merger of units, Cenvat credit transfer was treated as permissible where inputs, work-in-progress and capital goods stood transferred and were accounted for to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional authority; absence of prior permission from the Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner was not shown to be a statutory prerequisite, so the objection was not sustainable. On capital goods, Rule 4(2)(a) was read as allowing only 50% credit in the relevant financial year, with the balance available later; therefore, taking the remaining credit in a subsequent year was not rejected for pre-deposit purposes. The assessee was found to have a prima facie case and obtained waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery pending appeal. en-us Mon, 14 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 May 2015 16:00:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170098 On merger of units, Cenvat credit transfer was treated as permissible where inputs, work-in-progress and capital goods stood transferred and were accounted for to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional authority; absence of prior permission from the Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner was not shown to be a statutory prerequisite, so the objection was not sustainable. On capital goods, Rule 4(2)(a) was read as allowing only 50% credit in the relevant financial year, with the balance available later; therefore, taking the remaining credit in a subsequent year was not rejected for pre-deposit purposes. The assessee was found to have a prima facie case and obtained waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery pending appeal. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 14 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170098