https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308797 The appellant's claim for remission of duty under Rule 21 of the Cenvat Excise Rules, 2002 was initially rejected by the Ld. Commissioner. However, upon review, it was established that the fire incident at the appellant's factory did occur. The court found that the requirement to reverse the cenvat credit on inputs in the destroyed goods, as stated by the Ld. Commissioner, was unsustainable based on the precedent set in the case of Joy Foam Pvt. Ltd. Consequently, the appellant's claim was allowed, and the appeal was successful as the impugned order was set aside. en-us Wed, 01 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Jul 2023 21:19:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308797 The appellant's claim for remission of duty under Rule 21 of the Cenvat Excise Rules, 2002 was initially rejected by the Ld. Commissioner. However, upon review, it was established that the fire incident at the appellant's factory did occur. The court found that the requirement to reverse the cenvat credit on inputs in the destroyed goods, as stated by the Ld. Commissioner, was unsustainable based on the precedent set in the case of Joy Foam Pvt. Ltd. Consequently, the appellant's claim was allowed, and the appeal was successful as the impugned order was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 01 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308797