9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 783X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Imlai unit when the fire on 8-11-2003 destroyed substantial parts of the capital goods. The claim of the applicant was that the scrap generated out of whatever destroyed has been cleared on payment of duty and whatever was reparable has been got repaired and received back in terms of Rule 4(5)(a). In the given facts and circumstances of the case, prima facie, it cannot be treated as a case of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taka and were using the same. Later on the same were shifted to their unit at Imlai in Madhya Pradesh where the same was installed on 3-6-2002 and used. There was fire accident on 8-11-2003 at the DG house in Imlai unit. The applicant received a total compensation of Rs. 4,45,91,991/- from Insurance Agency out of which a sum of Rs. 4,29,48,084/- related to destroyed capital goods on which credit h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of scrap was on payment of duty. The applicant also submitted that the insurance company settled only the value of the goods destroyed and not the duty amount involved. The Commissioner ordered recovery of credit of Rs. 68,71,693/- along with interest under Rule 12 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 and imposed equal amount as penalty. 3. Learned Advocate after narrating the above facts submits that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sets stands utilized for the intended purpose in the Karnataka unit for about five years and transferred to their Imlai unit and installed on 3-6-2002 and was being used in the Imlai unit when the fire on 8-11-2003 destroyed substantial parts of the capital goods. The claim of the applicant was that the scrap generated out of whatever destroyed has been cleared on payment of duty and whatever was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
