Remission of duty for destroyed excisable goods upheld where damage was admitted and no assessee negligence was shown.

Remission of duty on destroyed excisable goods was sustained where the cigarettes were admittedly damaged, destroyed under Central Excise supervision, and no negligence by the assessee was shown. The exact cause of contamination or damage was treated as immaterial because the Revenue produced no material to establish fault, and the earlier remission order had not been challenged. On that basis, duty remission was rightly allowed and the Revenue's challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether remission of duty was admissible on cigarettes destroyed after damage, notwithstanding the Revenue's objection that the exact cause of damage was not established.

Analysis: The damage to the cigarettes was not disputed. The cause of damage, whether oil or water contamination or otherwise, was held to be immaterial because there was no material showing negligence on the part of the assessee. The destruction had been carried out in the presence and supervision of Central Excise officers, and the prior order allowing remission under the erstwhile excise rules had not been challenged by the Revenue.

Conclusion: Remission of duty was rightly allowed and the Revenue's challenge failed.

Final Conclusion: The appeal was dismissed and the remission of duty on the destroyed cigarettes stood sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: Where excisable goods are admittedly damaged, destroyed under departmental supervision, and no negligence is shown, remission of duty cannot be denied merely because the exact cause of damage is disputed.

---