2000 (11) TMI 828

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....don, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - The appellants manufacture sugar, where molasses arise as the by-product. They had made an application for draining out the Molasses stored in Kutchcha pits, as the same had piled up due to delay in allotment of Molasses by the State Government Officers who also controlled the removal and disposal of Molasses under their law. This phenomena was spread....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ector and on de novo proceeding ordered by the Tribunal, another order dated 28-11-1997 was issued by which the remission of duty application was rejected on the grounds (i) appellants did not care to seek permission from the Commissioner of Central Excise for destruction, (ii) draining out on 30-10-1988 was not under supervision of competent Central Excise Officer, (iii) violation of Rule 47 was ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....xcise and non-compliance would result in violation of Rules 47 and 49. The appellants are in SRP, therefore, they have a right to take the deteriorated Molasses, out of the pits and remove them for agricultural purpose. Thus, effecting, what has been called a draining out the pit. If this was not done, fire hazard and pollution hazard would have occurred, besides stock piling of Molasses unfit for....