Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 1923 - AT - Central ExciseRejection of remission of duty filed under Rule 21 of the Cenvat Excise Rules, 2002 - rejection on the ground that the appellant is required to reverse the cenvat credit on inputs contained in finished goods, semi finished goods and work in progress - HELD THAT:- Considering the fact that it is a case of the claim of the remission of duty. It is not disputed the occurred of fire in the factory of the appellant, therefore, the appellant is entitled for claim of remission of duty. The only reasons to deny remission claim is that the appellant is required to reverse the cenvat credit on inputs contained in finished goods, work in progress and semi finished goods. The contention of the Ld. Commissioner is not sustainable in the light of the judgements in the case of THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE VERSUS M/S. JOY FOAM PVT. LTD., CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (CESTAT) [2015 (7) TMI 386 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] wherein the Honble High Court held that in case of fire, for the claim of remission of duty the assessee is not required to reverse the cenvat credit contained in work in progress, finished goods and semi finished goods. The impugned order deserves no merits, hence set aside by allowing the claim of remission of duty to the appellant - Appeal allowed.
|