Remission of duty on fire-destroyed goods allowed where destruction was accepted and negligence was not supported by facts.

Remission of duty was admissible on sugar bags destroyed in a fire caused by an electrical short circuit. Once the destruction of the goods was accepted and the fire's origin was found to be a short circuit, attributing the loss to the assessee's carelessness was inconsistent with the recorded facts. The Revenue did not dispute that remission was otherwise available under the applicable excise rule, so denial of remission could not be sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether remission of duty was admissible on sugar bags destroyed in a fire caused by an electrical short circuit.

Analysis: The damaged goods were admittedly destroyed in the fire, and the lower appellate authority had itself found that the fire originated from an electrical short circuit. Once the destruction of the goods in the fire was accepted, the attribution of the accident to the assessee's carelessness was inconsistent with the recorded facts. The Revenue did not dispute that remission was otherwise admissible under Rule 49 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.

Conclusion: Remission of duty was admissible, and the denial of remission was not sustainable.

---