Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter

Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review

The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.

• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required


Step 2 – Draft Generation

Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.

• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review.

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

2016 (1) TMI 1197

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Tech, Agra against an Order-in-Original dated 30/03/2007 passed by Commissioner, Central Excise, Kanpur whereby the claim for remission of duty on the goods destroyed in fire accident have been rejected under Rule 21 of CER, 2002 read with Section 38A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and further confirming the duty amount of Rs. 43,98,638/-, being an amount claimed towards remission alongwith interest. The learned Commissioner has also observed that the remission claimed is not supported by any documentary evidence. Further, the appellant has failed to submit first information regarding fire within 24 hours of the happening of the incident and thereby Central Excise Officers were not able to verify the loss on the spot. Further, the fire ac....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tory were not sufficient and proper, to prevent occurrence of fire, held that the fire accident cannot said to have occured due to reasons beyond the control of the appellant. 3. The issue for consideration in this appeal by this Tribunal is whether the fire which occurred in the appellant's premises, which originally started in the adjoining factory and later on spread to his factory, was an unavoidable accident and can be said to have occured due to the reasons beyond control of the appellant and secondly, whether the appellant is entitled to the remission, as claimed by him. 4. The undisputed facts are that due to electric short circuit in the adjoining shoe factory of M/s. Jandiyal Shoe Factory, situated at Indra Mills Compound, J....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing staff and machinery. Further as per the report of the Chief Fire Fighting Officer, Agra that as the factory of M/s. Jandiyal shoe turned into an inferno, the employee of the said company could not take any effective steps to control the same. Further the inflammable materials lying in drums being raw materials, started burning profusely resulting into explosion thereby increasing the fire manifold. Further the fire started damaging the roof resulting into further increase of fire. Appellant's factory was situated above Golden Eagle Factory. Due to the intense heat and fire in the Golden Eagle Factory which resulted into explosion and blowing the roof and the same resulted in spread of fire to the appellant's factory. In the appellan's f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hok Kakkar Superintendent, visited the factory site on 17^th, 18^th and 20^th October, 1998. Further Mr. Manish Kumar, the then Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise, Agra also visited the appellant's factory on 17^th and 18^th October, 1998. Thus, it cannot be said that there was any negligence or delay on the part of the appellant in informing the loss due to fire immediately and expeditiously to the Excise Authorities. Further by way of alternate argument it was urged that the appellant was also eligible to avail exemption as provided under Notification No. 8/98-CE, as value of clearance during the financial year 1998-99 for home consumption was only Rs. 5,21,975/-. The appellant was eligible for full exemption of the aggregate clearance u....