2008 (10) TMI 507 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
- Rejection of application for remission of duty
- Contention of informing Range Superintendent
- Fire accident and quantum of sugar lost
- Verification by central excise officers
- Entitlement to claim remission of duty

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against the rejection of the application for the remission of duty amounting to Rs. 52,615 involved in 619 bags of sugar. The Adjudicating Authority rejected the application on the grounds that the appellant informed the Range Superintendent by registered post, not within 24 hours as claimed, and changed their stand regarding the quantity of sugar lost during the fire accident.

The appellant's representative argued that the fire occurred at their factory, was verified by central excise officers, and was not due to anyone's negligence. They also mentioned that the Insurance Company settled the claim for 619 bags of sugar, which was communicated to the central excise officers. The representative relied on various Tribunal decisions to support their case.

Upon review of the records, it was found that a fire broke out at the factory due to a burst electric bulb, and the central excise officers confirmed damage to 126 bags of sugar. The appellant later claimed 619 bags were burnt, but no remnants were available. The Tribunal held that no accident could be attributed to carelessness and that the appellant was entitled to remission of duty for the 126 bags damaged during the fire. Therefore, the impugned order was modified, allowing the remission of duty for the 126 bags of sugar damaged in the fire accident.

In conclusion, the appeal was allowed, and the appellant was granted the remission of duty involving the 126 bags of sugar damaged during the fire accident, as verified by the central excise officers.