Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2017 (12) TMI 704

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... fire accident - the claim of remission of duty cannot be rejected on the said ground. CENVAT credit - Held that: - Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Grasim Industries [2006 (8) TMI 69 - CESTAT,NEW DELHI] held that the appellant was not required to reverse the Cenvat credit attributable to inputs gone in manufacturing of final goods lost in fire accident - no reversal of Cenvat credit was required to be reversed by the appellant. The appellant is entitled to claim of remission of duty of the finished goods lost in fire accident - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/11097/2017 - A/13789/2017 - Dated:- 23-11-2017 - Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) For the Appellant : Shri Sachin Chitnis, Advocate .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... m of remission of duty. Thereafter, the show cause notice dated 19.12.2007 was issued to the appellant to deny claim of remission of duty. The matter was adjudicated and claim of duty was rejected by order dated 12.08.2008 which was challenged before this Tribunal and this Tribunal vide order dated 11.11.2008 remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority with certain directions. In remand proceedings, the claim of remission of duty was rejected. Against the said order, the appellant is before me. 3. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that the Ld. Adjudicating Authority was required to follow the directions of this Tribunal and after following the directions of this Tribunal was required to examine the issue in the light o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... .C.). 5. Heard the parties and considered the submissions. 6. In this case, the main arguments by the Ld. AR for the Revenue is that onus is on the appellant to prove that the fire accident took place was beyond their control and they have taken proper precaution to avoid to the fire accident. Admittedly, there is no doubt that it is onus on the appellant to prove that the fire accident was unavoidable. The appellant has produced the documents like FIR with panchnama drawn by the police, claim of insurance sanctioned by the insurance company on the basis of survey report. In the case of fire accident, the report of surveyor is a crucial document to prove that the fire accident took place in the factory due to unavoidable circumstanc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates