<?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>2017 (6) TMI 665 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344394</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal against the Order-in-Original granting remission of duty for burnt goods in the respondent&#039;s factory due to a fire accident. The Tribunal found that the respondent had taken preventive measures and reported the accident to statutory agencies. Referring to prior cases, the Tribunal emphasized a liberal interpretation of &quot;unavoidable accident&quot; for duty remission. Citing relevant judgments, the Tribunal concluded that the fire was beyond the respondent&#039;s control, upholding the remission of duty. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the decision to allow remission of duty for the destroyed goods.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 23 Sep 2017 10:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=472375" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (6) TMI 665 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344394</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal against the Order-in-Original granting remission of duty for burnt goods in the respondent&#039;s factory due to a fire accident. The Tribunal found that the respondent had taken preventive measures and reported the accident to statutory agencies. Referring to prior cases, the Tribunal emphasized a liberal interpretation of &quot;unavoidable accident&quot; for duty remission. Citing relevant judgments, the Tribunal concluded that the fire was beyond the respondent&#039;s control, upholding the remission of duty. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the decision to allow remission of duty for the destroyed goods.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344394</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>