https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121523 The Tribunal allowed the appeal (EDM-94/06) regarding the rejection of a claim for remission of duty due to an accident at the appellants' non-dutiable paid Depot. The Tribunal found the accident beyond the appellants' control and granted remission of duty, setting aside the impugned order. However, the Tribunal rejected the appeal (EDM-375/06) for confirmation of demand of duty for impugned goods due to jurisdictional limitations and lack of necessary clearance from the Committee on Disputes, advising the appellants to seek alternative remedies. The decision underscores the importance of compliance with procedural requirements for maintainability of appeals before the Tribunal. en-us Mon, 26 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Jul 2012 13:05:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121523 The Tribunal allowed the appeal (EDM-94/06) regarding the rejection of a claim for remission of duty due to an accident at the appellants' non-dutiable paid Depot. The Tribunal found the accident beyond the appellants' control and granted remission of duty, setting aside the impugned order. However, the Tribunal rejected the appeal (EDM-375/06) for confirmation of demand of duty for impugned goods due to jurisdictional limitations and lack of necessary clearance from the Committee on Disputes, advising the appellants to seek alternative remedies. The decision underscores the importance of compliance with procedural requirements for maintainability of appeals before the Tribunal. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 26 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121523