TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (8) TMI 958
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uated in Chrompet to another of their unit in Appur village during the period from July 2007 to November 2007. They ceased manufacturing activity at their Chrompet Unit in October 2007. The appellant requested permission vide their letter dated 24.10.2009 for transfer of CENVAT credit available in their CENVAT credit account from Chrompet Unit to that of Appur unit. The authorities permitted transfer of balance of credit lying unutilized as on 31.10.2007 of Rs.3,64,704/- (Excise duty) and Rs.36,620/- (service tax) along with credit of Rs.16,334/- taken on capital goods during October 2007. Vide letter dated 14.2.2012, the department informed the appellant that the credit taken beyond October 2007 is not eligible for transfer as the unit at ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... service providers. They could complete the payments to all service providers only in the fag end of Oct.2007 and as a result, the accumulated credit of service tax was taken in the month of Nov.2007. In the absence of any statutory time limit for availing CENVAT credit, the appellants' act of availing credit for input services, received in their Chrompet factory between Oct.2006 and Oct.2007, in the month of Nov.2007 was very much in order and the mere fact that there was no manufacturing activity in Chrompet division in the month of Nov.2007, should not have been a reason for denial of CENVAT credit for service taxes paid for various services provided when there were manufacturing activities in their Chrompet factory. The Ld. Counsel ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... rejection of appellants request for transfer of credit for input services received during Oct.2006 to Oct.2007, in their Chrompet Unit. 3.2 The learned AR reiterated the points given in the impugned order and prayed that the order may be upheld. 4. I have gone through the appeal carefully and have heard the rival parties. I find that under the CENVAT scheme there is no one to one correlation between the inputs and the final product. During the impugned period there was no time limit during which credit had to be taken on duty paid documents. In the absence of any allegation of fraud or that the documents on which the credit was availed was not proper or that the inputs were not at all used for the manufacture of the final product, the cr....