https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439880 The case clarified jurisdiction between CESTAT Hyderabad and CESTAT Chennai for specific regions. The Appellants, ceramic tile manufacturers, sought remission of duty under Rule 21 of Central Excise Rules, 2002, due to damages from a violent incident. The Arbitral Tribunal granted compensation, acknowledging the unavoidable nature of the damage, and ruled in favor of remission. This decision emphasizes the application of Rule 21 in cases of unavoidable losses caused by external factors, setting aside the duty demand and allowing the Appeal. en-us Tue, 04 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Jul 2023 08:00:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439880 The case clarified jurisdiction between CESTAT Hyderabad and CESTAT Chennai for specific regions. The Appellants, ceramic tile manufacturers, sought remission of duty under Rule 21 of Central Excise Rules, 2002, due to damages from a violent incident. The Arbitral Tribunal granted compensation, acknowledging the unavoidable nature of the damage, and ruled in favor of remission. This decision emphasizes the application of Rule 21 in cases of unavoidable losses caused by external factors, setting aside the duty demand and allowing the Appeal. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 04 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439880