9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 1712X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ods and Cenvat credit availed on inputs. 2. A show cause notice was issued to the appellant intimating that when matter will be heard by the Commissioner and also pointing it out as to why the department entertained a view that they are not eligible for the remission. The points contained in the notice are as under : The assessee stated that they have given intimation about the fire accident to the Range Officials on 30-4-2006 whereas as per Range records, the intimation was received on 28-6-2006. As the assessee have not intimated about the fire accident within 24 Hrs, the Range Officers visited the accident site only on 29-6-2006. Due to this the extent of damage could not be verified by the department. The assessee claimed remi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m of loss of excisable goods as per the documents produced by the assessee is Rs. 51,78,500/- whereas the loss as per Central Excise records is Rs. 66,59,018/-. As seen from the (i) FIR filed with Police Station (ii) report of Fire 86 Emergency Services dept and (iii) compliance report of the assessee to the Deputy Inspector of Factories has observed that the cause of fire accident is different in each report. The assessee have not furnished insurance survey report. Remission of duty on inputs, capital goods and civil works does not arise, as no duty is payable on them. After hearing the appellant the impugned order has been passed rejecting the claim for remission. 3. The learned consultant submits that no accident can be con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... conclusion. Therefore the order of Deputy Chief Inspector of Factories dated 19-5-2006 is important. Further on going through the records it is also found that the police went ahead with prosecution of three persons which finally ended in the acquittal of the persons since the witnesses produced by the prosecution did not support their case and there was no other evidence. This shows that police also felt that accident was avoidable. The fact that police prosecuted three persons would show that police treated the fire as not at all an accident which is much more serious than the accident being avoidable or happened because of negligence. The circumstances are peculiar in this case wherein police and fire department both have entertained th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
