9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 1708X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ganeshwar (Superintendent) for the Respondent ORDER This appeal is directed against Order-in-Original No. 20/2011(RS) dated 06.06.2011 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. On perusal of records, it transpires that on 11.01.2009 there was a fire accident in the factory of the appellant; in the said accident finished goods, semi finished goods and raw materials were destroyed. Appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the manufacture or production of said goods. The appellant did not agree with contention of the revenue authorities hence a Show Cause Notice dated 08.02.2010 was issued for demand of Cenvat Credit involved in the inputs which were issued for production and were contained in the semi finished goods, intermediate goods that was discharged in the fire. Appellant contested Show Case Notice on mer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... credit attributable to the inputs contained in the goods which according to appellants were semi finished goods and intermediate goods, destroyed during fire accident. 6. We find from entire case records that revenue authorities were in fact seeking details of the stage at which the goods which were destroyed in fire accident. Appellant had not responded to the said communications from the author ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e remission of duty was sought, the impugned order confirming the demands raised of reversal of Cenvat Credit on the inputs seems to be correct. Accordingly we uphold the impugned order that confirms demand along with interest. 8. As regards penalty, we find, penalty imposed by the adjudicating authority is unwarranted as the issue was in knowledge of light of the authorities, in our view saddlin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
