TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1985X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l not be fetal for claim of remission of duty when it is the fact on record that fire took place in the premises of the appellant. Therefore, claim of remission of duty cannot be denied on this ground. In the fire accident the factory building, capital goods and all excisable goods have been lost. No prudent men would invite fire accident to avoid payment of excise duty. It is a fact on record that fire accident took place due to short circuit in electric wire. The, short circuit in electric wire is not in the hand of a man who could avoid such accident. Therefore, it cannot be the reason that appellant failed to take necessary steps to avoid fire accident. Therefore, on this ground also claim of remission of duty cannot be denied. Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat they have recovered the duty element from insurance company, and; c) They have not intimated to the department within time. 3. Consequently, the claim of remission of duty was denied. In consequent to that duty is demanded by the appellant by passing another order along with interest and imposition of penalty. Aggrieved from the said orders appellant is before me. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that in earlier round of litigation this Tribunal has dismissed their appeal on the ground that appellant has failed to produce the evidence that they have not received duty element from insurance company. The said order was challenged by the appellant before the Honble High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The Honble High Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant informed to the Department. Therefore, it cannot be said that appellant was negligent by not informing to the department. 5. He further submits that on 24.04.2002 department officers came to the factory of the appellant to ascertain the fact that whether fire took place in the factory or not. He also submits that appellant intimated to the fire department and to the police regarding the incidence of fire immediately. In these circumstances, he prayed that impugned order be set aside. 6. On the other hand, Ld. AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 7. Heard the parties. Considered the submission. 8. In this case the claim of remission of duty has been denied to the appellant on the following grounds: a) Non in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s ground also claim of remission of duty cannot be denied. 11. On the issue of claim received by the appellant from Insurance Company appellant has produced the document on record that insurance company has not sanctioned the amount of duty as claim of insurance to the appellant. In these circumstances, it cannot be said that appellant has received duty element in their insurance claim. Therefore, on this ground also claim of remission of duty cannot be denied. 12. With these observations, I hold that appellant is entitled for claim of remission of duty. Consequently, demand of duty along with interest cannot be confirmed against the appellant and consequently, penalty is not imposable. With these observations, impugned orders are set ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
