<?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>2009 (8) TMI 888 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127997</link>
    <description>Remission of duty was held admissible for duty-free indigenous raw materials destroyed in a fire at the factory premises. The record did not discredit the assessee&#039;s explanation that reasonable precautions had been taken to safeguard the materials and that electrical installations were periodically checked. In the absence of evidence establishing negligence or carelessness in preventing the fire loss, the claim for remission could not be rejected on that basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Mar 2013 16:14:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164869" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (8) TMI 888 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127997</link>
      <description>Remission of duty was held admissible for duty-free indigenous raw materials destroyed in a fire at the factory premises. The record did not discredit the assessee&#039;s explanation that reasonable precautions had been taken to safeguard the materials and that electrical installations were periodically checked. In the absence of evidence establishing negligence or carelessness in preventing the fire loss, the claim for remission could not be rejected on that basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127997</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>