TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (4) TMI 1172
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....006 passed by learned Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi. The following substantial questions of law arises in the present appeal:- 1. "Whether the loss and destruction of goods because of accidental fire which took place in the appellant factory falls within the meaning of the phrase "goods have been lost or destroyed by natural causes or by unavoidable accident" for purposes of remission of duty under Rule 21 of the Central Excise Rule, 2002? 2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, learned Tribunal was legally justified in rejecting the claim of remission of duty under Rule 21 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 even though the cause of accident in the appellant factory was accidental fire?" ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uiry report. The appellant vide letter dated 13.6.2003 submitted further documents with the Superintendent, Central Excise, Range 14, Division II, NOIDA. In the said communication apart from the other clarifications and documents, it was clearly mentioned that "We have not filed any claim with the insurance company for the excise duty for which the above remission has been applied". In fact, the insurance company do not reimburse excise duty where the same has not been paid as a matter of principle. Learned Commissioner, Customs & Central Excise, Division II, NOIDA vide its order No. 38/Commissioner/NOIDA/2005, dated 27.12.2005 adjudicated the remission application and passed the order of the rejection of the application filed by the app....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mposed. The expressions "natural causes" or "unavoidable accident" have to be interpreted in their ordinary and natural connotation. An unavoidable accident is an event which lies beyond the control of the assessee and which has taken place despite the exercise of due and reasonable care and protection. Both the expressions have to be construed in a reasonable manner to sub-serve the object of the legislature in introducing the provision for remission of duty in rule 21." Furthermore, learned counsel for the appellant also relied on Union of India Vs. Hindustan Zinc Limited reported in [2009(233)E.L.T. 61 (Raj.)] wherein Rajasthan High Court has held "that the expressions "natural causes" or "unavoidable accident" required to be given re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellant. So no question of law is involved in the present appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant rebutted the argument of the learned counsel for the respondent and submitted that perversity of the finding itself becomes a question of law as held by Supreme Court and Dale & Carrington Investment Private Ltd. Vs. P.K. Prathapan and others. So when finding of Tribunal regarding the cause of fire is based on no material and he has jumped to the conclusion straightway without considering any material evidence adduced by the appellant it will be deemed to be a perverse finding. Tribunal ought to have considered all the facts as was held by Hon'ble Apex Court in Omar Salay Mohamed Sait vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras. There is re....