Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI OCR

Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2013 (12) TMI 336

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Cenvat credit of Rs. 2,74,718.70 involved in the destroyed packing material stands confirmed, as a consequent of rejection of their remission application. 2. After hearing both the sides we find that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Caustic Soda flackes falling under Chapter 28 and other Chemical products falling under Chapters 28 and 29 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The issue involved in the present appeal is remission of duty in respect of final products as also packing materials destroyed in the appellant factory during a fire which took place on 10-4-1997 at 5'o clock in evening. A copy of FIR filed with the police and fire brigade report both dated 10-4-1997 stands produced on record. It is seen that besides l....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....onary measures, with respect to testing of raw material process control and storage of goods, were monitored. This fact is further substantiated from the statements of concerned personnel of the unit, as stated hereinabove. As such, I find no force in the assessee's contention that the cause of fire was not at all of negligence or want of precaution. As such, the remission claim is liable for rejection. Accordingly, I pass the following order." 4. As is seen from above, there is no dispute about the fact of fire in the appellant's factory and the resultant damage to the goods. The Commissioner has not considered the excessive heat as a natural cause for destruction on the ground that the assessee had not taken adequate precautions to avoid....