9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 280X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ished goods/intermediaries, packing material and machineries. On intimation, the factory was visited by the excise officers. The insurance company while assessing the claim for fire losses deducted the cenvat credit on inputs. On the basis of loss assessed by the Surveyor the Appellant filed application for remission of duty in respect of damage of finished goods of 61496 Kgs. They also reversed the credit of raw material damaged in fire. The Surveyors supervised the sale of scrap generated due to fire as salvage and after obtaining quotations the scrap and salvaged goods were sold. The goods including M.S. Scrap, burnt steel structures, scrapped drums were sold to Shabbir Ahmed and Co. for Rs. 2,74,098/- and this amount was deducted from t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the drum, batch number and quantity it was found that the same was tallying with the goods on which remission of duty has been claimed by the Appellant. The said drums were purchased by M/s Noor Printing press from Shabbir Ahmed who in turn purchased it from Appellant Unit. On verification it was revealed that serial number of one of the drum tallied with one entry in the list of the finished goods. That as finished goods, intermediaries and semi finished goods were cleared as scrap without payment of central excise duty on the finished goods therefore cenvat credit availed on the inputs used in the manufacture of said intermediaries and finished goods is liable to be recovered from the Appellants. He held that salvaged Printing Ink was cle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... andestinely. There is no evidence in the impugned order linking the printing ink found in Noor Printing press with the printing inks which are subject matter of remission claim. They did not have any relation with Noor Printing Press. The Printing ink found at Noor Press premises was on 17.02.2005 which is almost 14 months after the fire at Appellant factory. As per Commissioner the only alleged connection between the goods found at Noor Printing Press and the goods destroyed is one single drum of 20 Kgs bearing serial number YL/19343. This serial number is product code and represents one type of ink manufactured by the Appellant viz 'Starlam 2 Parle LT Green'. The YL & SFL marking on some drums is wholly irrelevant as they have 250 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... clearly demonstrates that the drums found at M/s Noor Printing press has no connection with the goods of remission claim. That owner of M/s Noor Printing press though undertook to produce the bill could not produce the same and Shri Shabbir Ahmed in his statement has clearly stated that he was not aware whether the drums he had purchased from Appellant as scrap contained printing ink or not. Therefore it could not be said that the printing ink found at the factory of Noor Printing Press was cleared by the Appellant. The contention of the department that they have cleared printing ink for which they have applied for duty remission is wrong. The clearance of scrap i.e metal scrap viz. heavy scrap like beams and angles etc. as well as light sc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to link the alleged 100 drums found at M/s Noor Printing Press with the goods in respect of which the remission claim was filed by the Appellant as no identity between the damaged goods and goods found in the premises of Noor Printing press has been shown. Even in case of one 20 kgs drum found at M/s Noor Printing press I find that the Appellant are manufacturing more than 100 drums in a year with same marking and no evidence has been adduced from any source to show that the said drum has been cleared by the Appellant in the guise of damaged/ salvaged goods. Even it is not appearing from the statement of either owner of M/s Noor Printing Press or Shri Shabbir Ahmed that the drums were cleared by the Appellant concern. In such case I do not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ence relied upon by the adjudicating authority nowhere leads to the conclusion that the goods in respect of which the remission has been claimed were removed clandestinely. I thus do not find any reason to demand duty and to reject the remission claim of the Appellant in respect of finished goods. I therefore hold that the Appellants are eligible for remission of duty on finished goods and the demand of Rs. 11,90,752/- against the Appellant and penalty is not sustainable and is required to be set aside. 8. In case of cenvat credit demand of inputs used in finished goods destroyed in fire, I am of the view that there is no dispute about the facts. The issue of reversal of cenvat credit of inputs used in finished goods stands settled by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
