9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (11) TMI 219X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der].- This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No.VGN(30)381 /TF/1998/8678 dated 18-10-2000. 2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are that there was a fire accident in the factory of the appellant on 16-3-1997 and on 17-5-1997. In the fire accident, the raw materials and finished goods were destroyed. The appellant filed remission application for finished goods, which were destroyed in the factory due to fire accident, through letter dated 15-6-1998. A show cause notice dated 22-7-1999 was issued to the appellant for rejection of the remission claim on the ground that the intimation of the fire was given by the appellant to the authorities belatedly. The Commissioner of Central Excise Customs, Aurangabad vi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 19-5-97 at 10.30 hrs. 4. On the merits, it is her submission that there is no dispute that the finished goods were destroyed. She submits that, time frame of 24 hours as relied upon by the adjudicating authority as well as by the Commissioner (Appeals) in there order as per provisions of Rule 49 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 has not been fulfilled, is not correct. She relies upon the Division Bench decisions of the Tribunal in the case of Jindal Polyester v. CCE, New Delhi as reported at 2003 (152) E.L.T. 228 (Tri. - Del.) and Plastikos Packaging v. CCE, Allahabad reported at 2001(128) E.L.T. 386 (Tri.-Del.). It is also her submission that Commissioner (Appeals) has wrongly mentioned that the remission application has b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the "adjudicating authority" means any authority competent to pass any order under this Act. In the case before me, the Commissioner while passing that order of rejecting the remission application has very clearly mentioned that this is an order, which can be appealed under Section 35B, if felt aggrieved. It is also seen from the said order that the Commissioner has mentioned as under : - "If aggrieved, assessee may prefer an appeal under Section 35B of Central Excise Act, 1944." This would indicate that the order, which has been passed by the Commissioner while rejecting the remission claim, is passed by the adjudicating authority. Further, to my mind, any order or decision, due to which the assessee's right and liability is affe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e accident officials did not visit the premises on the same date. The authorities could have called for information from police or fire brigade about the accidents. Having not done so, the Commissioner's order of rejecting the remission claim for not filing the information within 24 hours seems to be incorrect and not sustainable. 8. As regards the submission of the ld. JDR that the appellant did not apply for condonation of delay for late submission, I find that this proposition of law is totally unsustainable for the reason that the assessee was under tremendous pressure due to loss of properties. The finding of the Commissioner that fire took place on 17-5-1997, intimation was delayed even to police, is on wrong footing. If the Polic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
