2017 (3) TMI 230

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e department, for the merger of Plant no.2 with Plant no. 1 with effect from 01.05.2008 and after merger the combined entity is known as M/s APL and has the Central Excise Registration No. AAACA6213GXM001. A show cause notice was issued to the appellant alleging that after merger of both plants, the CENVAT Credit account of Rs. 90,845/- as well as Personal Ledger Account (PLA) with balance of Rs. 6,25,949/- of Plant No. 2 was transferred to the newly formed entity against the provisions of law and there upon proposing to confirm the demand along with interest and proposing for imposing penalty. After due process of law, the original authority dropped the demand in respect of the alleged transfer of CENVAT Credit account but confirmed the de....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the assets of the new unit. That therefore the PLA of the earlier unit (Plant No. 2) has to be merged and transferred to the new unit that has come into existence. The Ld. Counsel also explained that law provided specific provision in CENVAT Credit Rules for transfer of CENVAT Credit account for the reason that the invoices having been issued in the name of earlier unit, can be verified by the department to check whether the new unit is taking any ineligible credit. He relied upon the decisions of CCE, Hyderabad Vs Kedia Vanaspathi Ltd., [2010-TIOL-702-CESTAT-Bang] and Jay Shree Tea & Industries Ltd., Vs CCE, Kolkata [2005 (215) ELT 63 (Tri-Kolkata)]. 3.  On behalf of department, the Ld. AR Sh. Arun Kumar reiterated the findings i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he question arises as to who has to apply for refund and who will get the refund. The earlier unit which was having the balance of PLA is no more in existence and cannot apply for such refund. The new unit that has come into existence cannot get the refund, since the amount in PLA if that be so, does not belong to it. In case of PSP Projects Pvt Ltd., vs CST, Ahmedabad [2016 (42) STR 301 (Tri-Ahmd)] similar issue was analysed. The Tribunal held as under: 4. On consideration of the arguments of both sides and scrutiny of records, it is observed that there is no dispute that Rs. 5,89,415/- was lying in the PLA account of M/s. BPC Projects as on 1-4-2009. Since M/s. BPC Projects merged with M/s. PSP Projects Pvt. Limited with effect fr....