Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Home Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles News Highlights
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

J.J. Foams Pvt. Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut I

2016 (11) TMI 410 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD

Imposition of penalty under Rule 25 & 27 - fire accident - 1874.500 kg. P.U. Foam blocks completely destroyed - Held that: - no finding against the appellant of any contumacious conduct, negligence or operating of their factory without proper consent as required under the law’s - penalty imposed set aside - appeal allowed. - Remission claim - levy of duty - Held that: - there is no dispute as to the occurrence of the fire in the factory of the appellant - the rejection of remission claim is .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

posed vide Order-in-Original ₹ 31,758/- under Rule 25 & 27 have been confirmed. 2. Heard the parties. 3. The admitted facts are that there was an incident of fire on 12.12.2005 in the factory of the appellant, wherein 1874.500 kg. P.U. Foam blocks were completely destroyed. Intimation of fire was given on 13.12.2005 to the Range Superintendent along with copy to the Deputy Commissioner. In the course of verification by the Excise Authority in the factory premises the stock was found Ni .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ve reversed the Cenvat Credit taken on input, used in the manufacturer of goods amounting to ₹ 30,967/-. They are filling application for remission of duty before Commissioner. Further, the claim submitted to the Insurance Company without including the element of duty. The demand was confirmed on contest observing that at the time of issuing of SCN appellant had not applied for remission of duty, but the same was applied subsequently on 19.04.2006. The Commissioner have rejected the remiss .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Section 11AC of the Act. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant has preferred appeal before learned Commissioner vide the impugned order having pleased to reject the appeal. 5. The learned Counsel for the appellant states that as the amount was small they have not contested the rejection of remission claim on merits and have deposited the duty as imposed on them. So for the penalty imposed is concern, the learned Counsel states that there is no finding of any mis patience and/or negligence or suppres .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version