https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286189 Civil miscellaneous appeals were admitted and substantial questions of law were framed on CENVAT credit entitlement after merger, where capital goods were originally received and owned by a separate unit before amalgamation. The court also framed a question on whether the Tribunal erred in not applying the Apex Court's 2010 guidelines when the respondent was said not to have satisfied the mandatory conditions for CENVAT credit under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The document concerns the legal effect of merger on credit availability and the proper application of governing conditions for availing CENVAT credit. en-us Fri, 17 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 16 Feb 2020 08:56:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286189 Civil miscellaneous appeals were admitted and substantial questions of law were framed on CENVAT credit entitlement after merger, where capital goods were originally received and owned by a separate unit before amalgamation. The court also framed a question on whether the Tribunal erred in not applying the Apex Court's 2010 guidelines when the respondent was said not to have satisfied the mandatory conditions for CENVAT credit under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The document concerns the legal effect of merger on credit availability and the proper application of governing conditions for availing CENVAT credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 17 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286189