2005 (3) TMI 208 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Remission of duty on account of fire breakage in factory

Analysis:
The issue in this case pertains to the remission of duty following a fire breakage in a factory where the appellant, a job worker, was engaged in working on medicaments. The fire incident occurred on 19-12-2000, resulting in significant losses, including machinery damage and the tragic death of seven workmen. The appellant notified the department on 3-1-2001 and subsequently applied for remission on 18-6-2001, with a reminder sent on 16-7-2001. The Commissioner rejected the remission request citing late filing as the reason. The appellant argued that there is no specified time limit for filing such applications, and the rejection was unjustified under the Central Excise Act and Rules. The appellant also highlighted the department's acknowledgment of the fire incident and submitted relevant documents like the FIR and panchnama. Additionally, the appellant pointed out a similar case where remission was granted by another Commissioner, further questioning the rejection based on late filing.

Upon review, the Tribunal found the Commissioner's decision to reject the remission claim as unjustifiable. The Tribunal noted that the grounds for rejection, particularly the late filing aspect, were deemed extraneous to the statutory provisions. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, dispensed with the pre-deposit requirement, and allowed the appeal at the stay stage itself. The decision underscores the importance of justifiability and adherence to statutory provisions in evaluating remission claims, emphasizing fair treatment and consistency in such matters.