https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176065 Remission of duty for goods destroyed by fire could not be refused on a negligence-based inquiry when the destruction by fire was undisputed. Rule 49 confined the proper officer to determining whether the goods were lost or destroyed by natural causes or unavoidable accident and were not otherwise accounted for under the Rules; an examination of whether the fire could have been prevented or whether adequate precautions were taken went beyond that scope. The denial of remission was therefore unsustainable, and relief was due to the assessee. en-us Wed, 18 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 Dec 2015 14:29:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176065 Remission of duty for goods destroyed by fire could not be refused on a negligence-based inquiry when the destruction by fire was undisputed. Rule 49 confined the proper officer to determining whether the goods were lost or destroyed by natural causes or unavoidable accident and were not otherwise accounted for under the Rules; an examination of whether the fire could have been prevented or whether adequate precautions were taken went beyond that scope. The denial of remission was therefore unsustainable, and relief was due to the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 18 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176065