TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (7) TMI 667
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Respondent. ORDER [Order per : Rajive Bhalla, J. (Oral)]. - By way of this order, we shall decide CEA Nos. 78 and 79 of 2013 (M/s. Barodia Plastics Private Limited v. Commissioner of Central Excise and Another). For the sake of convenience, facts are being taken from CEA No. 79 of 2013. 2. Counsel for the appellant submits that as admittedly there was a fire in the appellant's factory lead....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he appellant's prayer for remission cannot be accepted. Counsel for the appellant submits that consideration by the Tribunal is perverse and arbitrary as insurance companies do not insure against liability to pay Excise duty. It is prayed that as the appellant has placed relevant material to prove an accidental fire and the insurance claim has been accepted by the insurance company, the Tribunal m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ter received from the insurance company accepting its claim or other relevant materials. The Commissioner, however, for reasons, which are not germane for deciding the issue, rejected the claim. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed an appeal. The Tribunal has dismissed the appeal by holding as follows :- "5. I have considered the rival submissions and have perused the records. On....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pugned order. The appeal is therefore dismissed." 6. A perusal of the above extract reveals a consideration which is neither logical nor founded in law as insurance companies do not provide insurance against payment of taxes much less payment of Excise duty. The finding recorded by the Tribunal that the appellant has not proved that the insurance claim does not include Excise duty, is in our....