Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2014 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (8) TMI 325 - CESTAT MUMBAIRejection of remission application - ground adduced for rejection of remission application is that the godown of the appellant situated in 1 st floor of the appellant's premises was not part of the registered premises - Held that:- The remission of duty arises when duty is “payable” and when the goods gets destroyed or become unfit for consumption. In the present case, there is no dispute that the appellant has not paid any duty on the finished goods stored in the godown in the 1 st floor and therefore, they are rightly entitled for the remission of the duty payable. From the records, it is seen that as early as in September 2003 the appellant had intimated to the department that their godown is in the 1 st floor and the department had never objected to the storage of non-duty paid finished goods in the said godown. Even on 11 April 2005 when the department wrote to the appellant, they were only asked to reverse the Cenvat Credit taken on the inputs contained in the finished goods. There was no demand of duty on the finished goods stored in the godown, which also shows that the department has always been treating the godown in the 1 st floor as part of the approved premises. In these circumstances, the stand taken by the department for denial of remission stating that the godown in the 1 st floor was not part of the approved premises is contrary to the facts obtaining on records. Therefore, the appellant is rightly entitled for the remission of duty of the excise duty payable on the finished goods stored in the godown - Following decision of Sportking India Ltd. (2002 (7) TMI 136 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI) - Decided in favour of assessee.
|