2022 (1) TMI 1122

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for the Respondent ORDER The brief facts of the case are that the fire has taken place in the factory of the appellant and certain excisable goods were destroyed. They have filed an application for remission of duty under Rule 21 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 which has been rejected by the competent authority i.e. Commissioner against which this appeal was filed. 02. Shri S.Suriyanar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ey are not supposed to reverse as per this Tribunal judgment in the case of DIC INDIA LIMITED Vs.CCE- 2017 (12) TMI 280- CESTAT MUMBAI which has relied upon the judgment of the Larger Bench in the case of GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD Vs. CCE- 2007 (208) ELT 336 (Tri.- LB) and also in the case of CCE Vs. JOY FOAM PRIVATE LIMITED- 2015 (322) ELT 209 (Mad) 03. Shri G.Kirupanandan, learned Superintendent ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ence and file the documents if any, required. Without informing the appellant regarding the views of the learned Commissioner for rejecting the remission application is clearly a violation of Principles of Natural Justice. Therefore, in my view the case of the remission of duty needs to be reconsidered by giving the opportunity to the appellant to make their submission on all the points which the ....