TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (5) TMI 405
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssible and was required to be reversed. 2. The brief facts of the case are that due to heavy floods on 26.07.2005, semi finished goods and finished goods lying in the factory of the respondent have been destroyed. The respondent reversed the CENVAT credit attributable to the inputs contained in semi-finished and finished goods and applied for remission of the duty on the destroyed goods.Thereafter, the respondent requested for permission to re-credit the amount reversed, which was rejected. It was further contended that the inputs had been issued for the manufacture and has also undergone process of manufacture. The use of inputs in relation to manufacture of final product is sufficient for claiming the credit. The claim was rejected whic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tel Color Ltd. vs. CCE - 2004 (171) ELT 101 (Tri. Del). Therefore, the issue has attained finality, the impugned order is to be confirmed. 6. Heard and considered. 7. After hearing both the sides, I find the short issue involved in this case is that whether the credit availed on input contained in semi finished goods and finished goods which were lost in flood is required to be reversed or paid back. In the case of Grasim Industries (supra) while answering the issue the Larger Bench of this Tribunal has held that destruction of goods due to natural cause or by unavoidable accident during handling or storage cannot be equated with exemption to goods and the inputs can be considered to have been put to intended use....