2018 (4) TMI 889

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t, for Appellant Shri Gyanendra Kumar Tripathi, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for Respondent ORDER Per: Anil Choudhary The issue in this appeal is, whether the learned Commissioner have rightly rejected the remission claim of Central Excise duty amounting to Rs. 5,19,738/- under Rule 21 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. 2. The brief facts are that for the sugar season 2011-12, the appel....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....register were also annexed to the application. Further, the loss was also disclosed in the ER-1 Return filed for July, 2012 & August, 2012. 3. The learned Commissioner vide the impugned Order-in-Original dated 06/01/2017, was pleased to reject the claim, observing that the appellant failed to intimate the Department within 24 hours of loss and further the identification of storage tank was not ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he claim on flimsy and nonest grounds. Accordingly, prays for allowing the appeal with consequential benefits. 5. Heard the learned A. R. for Revenue who have relied on the impugned order. 6. Having considered the rival contentions and on perusal of the facts on record, I hold that the grounds given by the learned Commissioner, in the impugned order, for rejection of the remission claim are ....