Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether remission of duty on account of breakage and other losses of bottles was admissible where the declared loss was below the limit prescribed in the Board's circular and the losses were reflected in periodical returns.
Analysis: The dispute concerned allowance of remission for losses arising during manufacture and handling of aerated water bottles. The Board's circular prescribed that breakages up to 0.5% could be allowed, and the record showed that the appellant's losses during the relevant period were well below that threshold. The department did not dispute that the losses were regularly reported in periodical returns, and there was no finding that the losses exceeded the permissible limit. The objection based on absence of physical verification was not accepted where the reported losses were within the circular limit and the department had taken no contrary position on excess loss.
Conclusion: Remission of duty was admissible and the rejection of the remission applications was unsustainable.
Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded and the order rejecting remission was set aside.
Ratio Decidendi: Where losses are within the limit prescribed by a binding departmental circular and are consistently disclosed in returns, remission cannot be denied solely for want of physical verification in the absence of any finding that the losses exceeded the permissible threshold.