9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (7) TMI 1022X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion along with the appeal has been filed challenging the denial of Cenvat credit on the inputs contained in the work-in-progress (WIP) materials, which were destroyed in fire. 2. The issue involved in this case is that demand and recovery of Cenvat credit invoking the provisions of Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, on the raw material and packing material contained in the work-in-p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... whether in a factory or in warehouse. 4. The main contention of the ld. JDR was that it is a case of total loss and in case of loss this Tribunal does not have any jurisdiction to entertain the appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). He relied on the following judgments in support of his contention. (a) India Pistons Ltd. v. ACCE, Madras [1987 (27) E.L.T. 651] - wherein it was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 35B of Central Excise Act, 1944. Loss of goods in a storage in a factory - Loss of goods in whatever way or form, is a loss and so long as such loss occurs in storage, it is loss referred to in Section 35B and the Tribunal has no power to entertain the appeal and the view was taken by the Tribunal in the matter of BOC India Ltd., vide order No. A/19/09/WZB/Mum., dated 1-1-2009 wherein it was h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of the goods in this proviso. The fact that this has not been done, and that the proviso only refers to goods which are lost leads to the conclusion that the intention was in fact to limit the jurisdiction of the Tribunal only in the case of loss and not in the case of destruction and, therefore, it was held that the Tribunal has the jurisdiction. 6. He further relied on Unicure (I) Pvt Lt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd, the ld. Counsel has clearly justified the difference between loss and destroyed . The case before us being one of destruction of goods due to fire and not of loss of goods in transit or storage, we hold that this Tribunal is having jurisdiction to entertain this appeal and the same is maintainable before this Tribunal. 10. The preliminary objection raised by the JDR is dismissed. 11. Re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
