Excise duty on deteriorated brown sugar was unsustainable where the goods remained in stock and remission applied.

Brown sugar that had deteriorated through moisture absorption and was certified unfit for human consumption was held not to justify confirmation of excise duty where the goods remained in the factory and in stock records, so there was no removal. Rule 49 required duty on removal, while its proviso permitted remission for goods lost, damaged, or destroyed by natural causes or unavoidable accident. On those facts, the deterioration and inability to market or reprocess the goods supported remission, and the duty demand was unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether excise duty could be confirmed on brown sugar that had deteriorated in quality and become unfit for human consumption, and whether remission under Rule 49 was warranted.

Analysis: The quantity of brown sugar was found to have deteriorated due to moisture absorption and was certified unfit for human consumption. The goods continued to remain in the factory and in stock records, so the case was not one of removal. Rule 49 required duty on removal, and its proviso enabled remission where goods were lost, damaged, or destroyed by natural causes or unavoidable accident. On the facts found, the deterioration and inability to market or reprocess the goods provided no justification for confirming duty demand.

Conclusion: The duty demand was unsustainable and remission was warranted.

---