Remission of duty and credit reversal issues over fire loss, CBEC circular guidance, and Rule 21 scrutiny admitted for consideration.

The article examines whether remission of duty under Rule 21 can be claimed without reversing Cenvat or Modvat credit, including in the face of the CBEC circular dated 01.10.2004, and whether repeated fire incidents caused by the absence of fire safety measures can still qualify as unavoidable events for remission purposes. It focuses on the legal interaction between credit reversal requirements, administrative circular guidance, and the statutory standard for remission where loss arises from fire. The Gujarat High Court admitted the matter and issued notice on the substantial questions of law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that reversal of cenvat credit was not required for claiming remission of duty under Rule 21; whether the Tribunal erred in holding that reversal of modvat credit was not required despite the CBEC circular dated 01.10.2004; and whether repeated fire incidents due to absence of fire safety measures could still be treated as unavoidable events for consideration of remission under Rule 21.

Outcome: Admit. Issue notice on the substantial questions of law.

---