9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (2) TMI 405X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... M.B. Bal, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per: S.S. Kang, Vice-President]. - Heard both sides. 2. The Appellant filed this Appeal against the impugned Order whereby the request for remission of duty in respect of molasses which became unfit for consumption and marketing for the years, 1985-86 to 1987-88, was rejected by the Commissioner. 3. The main ground for rejection of the request for remi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... immediately, since the request for remission of duty was made. There is no evidence on record that the molasses in question were removed from the factory. The Appellant relied on the decisions of the Tribunal in the case of Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills v. CC&CE, Allahabad reported in 2007 (208) E.L.T. 234 (Tri.-Del.); in the case of Basti Sugar Mills Company Ltd. v. CCE, Allahabad reported in 2001 (1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty in the year, 1988. No action was taken by the Revenue in this regard. Only in the year, 2003, the Remission of Duty Application was rejected and the demand was confirmed. The case of the Appellant is that the molasses became unfit for consumption and marketing. As per the Board's Instruction, no sample was taken from the molasses in question by the Revenue. The Revenue relied upon the decisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the above decisions are not applicable to the facts of the present case, as in the present case, the Appellant applied for remission of duty in the year, 1988 and the Revenue has not verified whether the molasses had become unfit for consumption or marketing and only after 13 years, the request for remission of duty was rejected. There is no evidence on record to show that the molasses in question ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
