https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34404 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants in a case involving the denial of CENVAT credit due to the lack of permission under Rule 10 of CCR. The appellants successfully argued that no prior permission was required for transferring the credit during a merger as long as the input and capital goods were accounted for to the satisfaction of the department. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal and clarifying the interpretation of Rule 10 of CCR in relation to CENVAT credit transfers during mergers. The issue of the lack of a hearing opportunity became secondary to the primary issue of credit denial and did not impact the final decision. en-us Tue, 27 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 May 2011 18:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34404 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants in a case involving the denial of CENVAT credit due to the lack of permission under Rule 10 of CCR. The appellants successfully argued that no prior permission was required for transferring the credit during a merger as long as the input and capital goods were accounted for to the satisfaction of the department. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal and clarifying the interpretation of Rule 10 of CCR in relation to CENVAT credit transfers during mergers. The issue of the lack of a hearing opportunity became secondary to the primary issue of credit denial and did not impact the final decision. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 27 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34404