TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (4) TMI 126
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion 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 should be used in the factory of the manufacturer of final products for availing credit. The impugned capital goods, after being leased out, are in the factory of M/s. John Distilleries Ltd.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uch 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 of capital goods as such. We agree with the contention of the learned Advocate and also find that similar issues had been dealt with in the case laws in Metzeller Automotive Profiles India P. Ltd. and Jamna ....