2008 (5) TMI 38

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....R, for the Appellant. Dr. Samir Chakraborty, Advocate Assisted by Shri A. Biswas, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : Justice S.N. Jha, President]. - These Appeals by the Revenue came up before us on a Reference made by the Division Bench. In course of hearing a question arose as to the maintainability of the Appeals in view of Clause (a) of the first proviso to Section 35B of the Cen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f Supercoats Industries v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane-Il in 2005 (183) E.L.T. 255 (Tri.-LB), a Larger Bench of the Tribunal has held that loss of goods in whatever way or form, is a loss and so long as such loss occurs in storage, it is a loss referred to in Section 35B proviso. The relevant portion of the Larger Bench's decision may be extracted as under :- "7. We observe that the T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the Central Excise Act." 2. We are in respectful agreement with the above view of the Larger Bench. It would follow that the present Appeals arising out of the Order of the Commissioner (Appeals) relating to loss of goods in a storage in a factory are not maintainable before this Tribunal. 3. Indeed, the remedy in respect of matters like the present one is contained in Section 35EE of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Act. 5. Though it is not necessary to say so, in order to obviate any misgivings in this regard, we would like to clarify that the period spent during pendency of these appeals before the Tribunal shall not stand in the way of the Department in having the delay, if any, condoned by the appropriate authority, as we are satisfied that the Appeals were filed bona fide under proper legal advise. ....