<?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>2008 (10) TMI 60 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32049</link>
    <description>Remission of excise duty under Rule 49 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 is confined to goods lost or destroyed by natural causes or unavoidable accident, and the provision must be strictly construed as an exception to the general levy. Theft or dacoity is a deliberate forcible removal of goods, not a natural cause or unavoidable accident, so goods lost in such circumstances are not eligible for remission. The claim for remission was therefore rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 10 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=70691" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (10) TMI 60 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32049</link>
      <description>Remission of excise duty under Rule 49 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 is confined to goods lost or destroyed by natural causes or unavoidable accident, and the provision must be strictly construed as an exception to the general levy. Theft or dacoity is a deliberate forcible removal of goods, not a natural cause or unavoidable accident, so goods lost in such circumstances are not eligible for remission. The claim for remission was therefore rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32049</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>