9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 474X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mit Mahajan,CSC,Sp Kesharwani ORDER This is an appeal filed under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act against the order dated 25.3.2009 of the Tribunal. This appeal was admitted on 22.3.2012 on the following substantial question of law: "(i) Whether upon the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the claim of the appellant for remission of duty of molas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of manufacture of sugar molasses is also manufactured as 'by Product'. For the relevant period the assessee was liable to pay duty @ Rs. 50/- per quintal. During April, 2001 appellant's molasses clerk, Chief Chemist and U.P. Excise Inspector colluded with each other and issued 10020.40 qtls molasses by issuing F4 gate pass and Central Excise invoices without making entries in the exc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mises. Provided that the proper officer may not demand duty due on any goods claimed by the manufacturer as unfit for consumption or for marketing subject to such conditions as may be imposed by the commissioner by order in writing." The Commissioner has rejected the said remission application. He noted in his order: "In this case as per the units own statement, the clandestine removal or thef ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ins unexplained. Hence, even without going into the issue whether 'thefts' would fall with the ambit of cases to which remission duty can be claimed, for which they have cited some case laws, I find that the remission application is liable to be rejected on this ground alone." Against order of the Commissioner the assessee filed an appeal, which had also been dismissed vide order dated 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
