TMI Blog2008 (11) TMI 142X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stified - job worker had informed the police, the local GIDC and insurance company etc. who have all verified - only omission was that Central Excise authorities were not informed - once inputs are issued for manufacture, the requirement of CCR is fulfilled and therefore if the products get destroyed, the assessee need not have to reverse the Credit taken on the inputs - E/175/2005 - A/2499/2008 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... observed that appellants did not take insurance to cover duty element and goods were damaged by water used for extinguishing the power and not burnt in the fire as such. 2. Heard both the sides. The ld. DR reiterates the order passed by the Commissioner. On the other hand the ld. Advocate on behalf of the appellants submits that in this case inputs were cleared after processing the same parti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the assessed must have taken precaution to safeguard their materials and they have failed to do so. The remission claim has been rejected on the ground that the inputs were damaged not because of the fire but because of water used for extinguishing the fire. He relies upon the following decisions in support of his contention that Cenvat credit is admissible when the inputs have been issued for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... we find that the job worker had informed the police, the local GIDC and insurance company etc. who have all verified. We are unable to appreciate the argument of the Commissioner that since the fire did not destroy the inputs but by the water used for extinguishing the same, remission cannot be considered. Further even though remission application was filed in respect of duty payable on the mater ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issued for manufacture partially processed sent to the job worker got damaged because of the fire. Therefore, we hold that in view of the Larger Bench decision in M/s. Grasim Industries case, appellants need not reverse the credit of Rs. 7,72,000/- taken by them on inputs involving in the goods which have been destroyed. Thus the appeal is allowed. (Pronounced in Court on 26-11-2008) - - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
