9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 1240X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... udicating Authority i.e. Collector, Central Excise has passed adjudication order dated 03.01.1989, which reads as under : "1. M/s. Rosa Sugar Works Rosa Distt. Shahjahanpur, manufacturer of Sugar and molasses had stored 2933.40 qtls. and 12555.50 qtls. of molasses of the year 1985-86 in pits No.2 and 1 respectively and 18552.36 qtls. of molasses of 1986-87 year in tank No.1. In terms of bond executed by the manufacturer they were to pay all dues whether excise duty or other lawful charges, observe all the provisions of C.E. Rules 1944 and produce for charge of duty all exciseble goods manufactured at the factory or account for such goods to the satisfaction of the Collector. 2. M/s. Rosa Sugar Works Rosa insured the molasses lying in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d have taken but failed when molasses is always susceptible to auto combustion, which is a natural phenomena as has also been recognized in a Tribunal's judgment in New Phaltan Sugar Works Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Cus. & C. Ex., Pune-II 2002 (141) E.L.T. 720 (Tri. Mumbai), wherein Tribunal on the nature of commodity i.e. Molasses has said : "3. Spontaneous combustion built up due to latent heat in molasses stored is a common phenomenon aggravated by high ambient temperatures." 4. ....Combustion in molasses is a very serious affair controlling which is almost impossible. The rules do not prescribe any procedure for the assessees to follow to ensure that their goods are not destroyed." 6. He submitted that in fact neither show cause notice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reventive measure but what preventive measure could not be taken by petitioner to prevent loss of molasses due to fire, nothing is stated in the notice issued earlier nor in the order of adjudication dated 03.01.1989. Since department never confronted that petitioner has not taken such preventive measures as required and impugned order has been passed by assuming that such preventive measures have not been taken, the order is non speaking and unsustainable. 10. In our view, it is a non speaking order having failed to give due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and therefore, matter need be reexamined by Adjudicating Authority. 11. The writ petition is accordingly allowed to the extent that order dated 03.01.1989 passed by Adjudicati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
