TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 695X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tter for further action. The Central Excise officers did not follow up for any action. When the remission application was filed the same was rejected on the grounds which are not at all sustainable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Excise Appeals No.273 and 2980 of 2009 - A/54719-54720/2017-EX[DB] - Dated:- 6-7-2017 - Shri Dr. Satish Chandra, President And Shri B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical) Shri Kumar Vikram, Advocate for the appellant. Shri H.C. Saini, Authorized Representative (DR) for the Respondent. ORDER Per: B. Ravichandran These two appeals are connected matters dealing with the loss of molasses due to accident in the appellant s unit on 09/02/2006. The brief facts of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide another impugned order dated 31/08/2009, rejected the appeal and upheld the demand. 3. The learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that the accident was reported on the same day to the jurisdictional officers as evidenced from the acknowledgement dated 10/02/2006 given by the jurisdictional Inspector of Central Excise. The appellants had taken all the normal precautions while storing the excisable goods and the accident happened due to the nature of product, and it is the totally unforeseen. He further stated the State Excise Authorities have clarified vide letter dated 22/11/2006 that 62,289.50 qntls. of damaged molasses spread over the nearby places is not usable. They have given permission fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eir letter dated 09/02/2006 which was acknowledged by the Inspector of Central Excise on 10/02/2006. Further, a delay of 3 days in filing a police complaint has no relevance in considering the application for remission. It is surprising that the jurisdictional officer had not made any verification/inspection, including drawal of sample, survey of the damaged goods etc. even after the intimation was given by the appellant. Strangely, the Original Authority puts the burden on the appellant to establish that the molasses has been lost or destroyed by natural causes or by unavoidable accident. The Revenue did not initiate any action for drawal of sample or to survey the damages to ascertain the correctness of the claim made by the appellant. Fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
