<?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>2026 (6) TMI 1006 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793625</link>
    <description>Rule 21 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 is described as allowing remission for loss or destruction before removal through natural causes or unavoidable accident, and the text applies that principle to inevitable pre-removal handling and process losses in Pig Iron. It also notes that a 0.55% shortage was within the Board&#039;s product-specific 2% condonation norm for Pig Iron, making rejection on the basis that the loss was not due to flood, fire, cyclone or earthquake inconsistent with the remission regime. The text further points out that an order relying on Rule 223A of the erstwhile 1944 Rules is legally unsound where the governing framework is Rule 21 of the 2002 Rules.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Jun 2026 08:04:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=907930" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (6) TMI 1006 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793625</link>
      <description>Rule 21 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 is described as allowing remission for loss or destruction before removal through natural causes or unavoidable accident, and the text applies that principle to inevitable pre-removal handling and process losses in Pig Iron. It also notes that a 0.55% shortage was within the Board&#039;s product-specific 2% condonation norm for Pig Iron, making rejection on the basis that the loss was not due to flood, fire, cyclone or earthquake inconsistent with the remission regime. The text further points out that an order relying on Rule 223A of the erstwhile 1944 Rules is legally unsound where the governing framework is Rule 21 of the 2002 Rules.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793625</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>