Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →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 was payable under Section 23 of the Customs Act, 1962 and Rule 21 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 when imported and indigenous capital goods were destroyed in a fire before clearance for home consumption.
Analysis: The capital goods were destroyed in a fire accident while lying in bonded premises, and the destruction before clearance for home consumption was not in dispute. Section 23 of the Customs Act, 1962 provides for remission where imported goods are lost or destroyed before such clearance, and does not make prior payment of duty a condition precedent. Section 13 reflects the same legislative scheme for pilfered goods. The conditions of the notification could not be insisted upon after the goods had been destroyed by an unavoidable accident, since performance of an impossible obligation is excused. The reliance placed on the contrary decision was found inapplicable on its facts. The claim for remission in respect of the indigenous goods was not pressed.
Conclusion: Remission of duty on the imported capital goods destroyed in the fire was allowed, and the demand to that extent was set aside. The duty confirmed on the indigenous goods was left undisturbed.