9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (6) TMI 752X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d from the insurance company - Held that: - the Tribunal upon verification of the value in the invoices has recorded satisfaction that the insurance claim did not include the excise duty portion - it cannot be stated that the conclusions arrived at by the Tribunal are in any manner perverse or contrary to the evidence on record so as to warrant interference. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - 1363 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 24-6-2010 - D.A. Mehta and Ms. H.N. Devani, JJ. ORDER In this appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, appellant-Revenue has challenged order dated 29th December, 2008 made by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal proposing the following four questions :- (A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2002 and drew up a panchnama. Subsequently, the respondent made an application dated 15th May, 2002 before the Commissioner of Central Excise seeking remission of duty on finished goods damaged in fire valued at ₹ 19,47,798/- involving central excise duty amounting to ₹ 3,11,648/-. The Commissioner vide order dated 29th March, 2007 rejected the application. Being aggrieved, the respondent carried the matter in appeal before the Tribunal and succeeded. 3. Mr. R.J. Oza, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant-Revenue invited attention to the order made by the Commissioner to indicate that the respondent had failed to furnish any evidence to show that the goods were lost in an unavoidable accident or due to natural cau ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... immediately action had been taken to douse the fire. The Tribunal further noted that the circumstances of occurring of the fire and extinguishing the same as occurring in the panchnama supports the case of the respondent even though the Director had told the officers that he did not know the reasons for the fire. Accordingly, the Tribunal was of the view that there was no doubt that the fire had occurred because of an accident. 6. Insofar as the question of non-reversal of Cenvat credit is concerned, the Tribunal has placed reliance on an earlier decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal wherein it has been held that Cenvat credit is not required to be reversed. As regards the insurance claim, the Tribunal upon verification of the va ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
