https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105879 The Tribunal treated proved theft of excisable goods as falling within the remission language of "loss" and "accidents" in Rule 147 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The shortage was accepted as theft because the earlier finding had not been challenged, an FIR was lodged immediately, and the police report supported the theft under the Penal Code. Applying binding precedent that construed the remission provision broadly, the Tribunal held that theft qualified for remission and the duty demand was set aside. en-us Thu, 11 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Mar 2012 12:48:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105879 The Tribunal treated proved theft of excisable goods as falling within the remission language of "loss" and "accidents" in Rule 147 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The shortage was accepted as theft because the earlier finding had not been challenged, an FIR was lodged immediately, and the police report supported the theft under the Penal Code. Applying binding precedent that construed the remission provision broadly, the Tribunal held that theft qualified for remission and the duty demand was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 11 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105879