2012 (7) TMI 829

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... AR, for the Appellant. None, for the Respondent. ORDER Department has preferred this appeal against the order of Commissioner, Central Excise allowing remission of excise duty amounting to Rs. 15,82,450/- to the respondent under Rule 21 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 for the loss of 31649 qtls. of molasses stored in masonary tank due to auto-combustion on 25-4-2003. The loss was repor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Accordingly, vide impugned order he allowed duty remission of Rs. 15,82,450/-. 4. Sh. I. Baig, ld. AR for the appellant has pleaded that impugned order is not sustainable for the reason that remission has been granted ignoring the provision of Rule 21 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 which provides for remission of duty in case of loss or destruction of excisable goods by natural cause or unavoid....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t molasses were removed from the factory clandestinely. Only ground in appeal is that the accident of burning could have been avoided by taking adequate precaution. In this regard, we may note that there is nothing in the report of the State Excise officer who visited the site for inspection which may suggest that the respondent was negligent or he failed to take steps to ensure cooling of the pip....