https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54418 Duty paid on inputs issued to the manufacturing floor and subsequently destroyed in an accidental fire could not be demanded back, because the Tribunal applied the principle that remission is available where such goods are lost after being put into the manufacturing process. The earlier precedent on insurance settlement was treated as distinguishable since, here, the duty component had not been settled by the insurer. On those facts, the assessee's claim for remission succeeded and the Revenue could not insist on reversal of Modvat credit or recovery of duty on the burnt inputs. en-us Fri, 04 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Oct 2010 09:59:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54418 Duty paid on inputs issued to the manufacturing floor and subsequently destroyed in an accidental fire could not be demanded back, because the Tribunal applied the principle that remission is available where such goods are lost after being put into the manufacturing process. The earlier precedent on insurance settlement was treated as distinguishable since, here, the duty component had not been settled by the insurer. On those facts, the assessee's claim for remission succeeded and the Revenue could not insist on reversal of Modvat credit or recovery of duty on the burnt inputs. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 04 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54418