9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (9) TMI 99X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7-SM(BR)(PB) - Dated:- 20-9-2007 - [Order per] - The appellant filed this appeal against the impugned order whereby the Commissioner rejected the remission application for remission of duty on 607.90 quintals of molasses during the season 2003-04 filed in terms of Rule 21 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The main reason for rejection of the application is that there may be loss by way of leak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the entire season. He relied upon the decisions of the Tribunal as under :- (a) Ramala Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. v. CCE, Meerut -I - 2007 (213) E.L.T. 361 (T) = 2007 (80) RLT 261 (CESTAT-Del.) (b) Shakumbari Sugar Allied Industries Ltd. v. CCE, Meerut - 2004 (171) E.L.T. 286 (Tri.-Del). (c) Seksaria Biswan Sugar Factory (P) Ltd. v. CCE, Lucknow - 2005 (179 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is less than 2%. It is seen from the adjudication order that the appellant reported to the concerned Range office regarding loss of molasses in different steel tanks well in time. Therefore, there is no reason for the remission application. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief. (Dictated and pronounced in open Court) - - TaxTMI - TMI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
