2021 (6) TMI 450

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t. The appellant, which is an LTU filed rebate claim under Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Notification No.19/2004-CE(NT), dated 06.09.2004. While processing the rebate claims, it was noticed that the appellant had availed Cenvat Credit to the extent of Rs. 8,34,13,798/-transferred to them from their Kannur Unit in August, 2015 by inter-unit transfer under Rule 12A(4) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. According to department, inter-unit transfer of credit available to Large Taxpayer Unit has been restricted with effect from 11.07.2014 vide Notification No.21/2014-CE(NT), dated 11.07.2014. 2. Copy of letter dated 31.08.2015 was submitted by appellant, by which they intimated the department as to transfer of credit under Rule 1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s were rejected. Against such order, the appellant preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who upheld the same. Hence this appeal. 3. On behalf of the appellant, the learned counsel Shri K. Senguttuvan appeared and argued the matter. He filed detailed synopsis and submitted that the restriction of inter-unit transfer of credit will apply only in respect of credit availed on or after 11.07.2014. In the present case, the credit has been originally availed prior to 11.07.2014 by the Kannur Plant. Appellant's Kannur Unit availed credit prior to June, 2013. While filing refund claim of unutilized credit under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 it is a procedural requirement to debit the claim amount in their Cenvat account. The a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....en by the appellant can be considered as a fresh credit or not and also whether the transfer of credit from Kannur Unit to Irungattukottai Unit is hit by Rule 12A(4) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. He argued that this issue would fall within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. 5. The learned Authorised Representative Ms. Sridevi Taritla raised strong objections with regard to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal in deciding the appeal. She adverted to section 35B of Central Excise Act, 1944 and submitted that if the impugned order relates to rebate of duty of excise of goods, the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to decide the appeal. In the present case, the appeal arises out of rejection of rebate claim filed under Rule 18 of Central Excise ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....other factory, or from one warehouse to another, or during the course of processing of the goods in a warehouse or in storage, whether in a factory or in a warehouse; (b) a rebate of duty of excise on goods, exported to any country or territory outside India or on excisable materials used in the manufacture of goods which are exported to any country or terri-tory outside India; (c) goods exported outside India (except to Nepal or Bhutan) without payment of duty; 6[(d) credit of any duty allowed to be utilised towards payment of excise duty on final products under the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder and such order is passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on or after the date appointed under section 109 of....