<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1986 (10) TMI 229 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72756</link>
    <description>Where excisable molasses stored in kaccha pits was lost, destroyed or deteriorated by heavy rain, flooding, spontaneous combustion, pit collapse or long storage, the Tribunal treated the damage as loss by natural causes and accepted remission where the goods were unfit for distillation or consumption. It further held that the Central Excise remission scheme controlled the field: duty could not be recovered merely on the basis of a B-2 bond or trade notice when the rules entitled the manufacturer to remission. Any separate enforcement of the bond was outside the excise adjudication. The result was rejection of duty recovery and acceptance of remission for natural loss or deterioration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 May 2011 18:00:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=111035" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (10) TMI 229 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72756</link>
      <description>Where excisable molasses stored in kaccha pits was lost, destroyed or deteriorated by heavy rain, flooding, spontaneous combustion, pit collapse or long storage, the Tribunal treated the damage as loss by natural causes and accepted remission where the goods were unfit for distillation or consumption. It further held that the Central Excise remission scheme controlled the field: duty could not be recovered merely on the basis of a B-2 bond or trade notice when the rules entitled the manufacturer to remission. Any separate enforcement of the bond was outside the excise adjudication. The result was rejection of duty recovery and acceptance of remission for natural loss or deterioration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72756</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>