9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1892X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s but, nonetheless, not recoverable because there is no removal. We see no purpose in a fresh ascertainment from non-available records when the sanction of insurance claim, establishing loss of the goods, sufficed for exercise of discretion by the competent authority. In any case, for reasons explained ibid, there is no revenue implication. Rule 21 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 is unambiguously clear that it is for the Commissioner of Central Excise to come to conclusion, based on his satisfaction and from the evidence of damage, about the extent to which the claim should be allowed. The impugned order has failed to do so. The damage that was effected by the floods is evident from the several records including complaint with the police a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ₹ 25.13 lakhs, was settled at ₹ 33.16 lakhs. The application was rejected by order dated 18th March, 2010 and, on seeking intervention of the Hon ble High Court of Bombay through writ remedy, the matter was remanded back to the competent authority for placing the assessee on notice should there be any intent to reject the application. 3. The impugned order has rejected the claim for remission on the ground of lack of documentary evidence in the form of excise records and with the finding that the estimation of surveyor is not an acceptable substitute. It was also held that, as per Circular No. 800/33/2004-CX, dated 1st October, 2004 of Central Board of Excise Customs, credit of duty paid on inputs used in the manufacture o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... available and decided not to place on the report of the surveyor which was the basis for sanction of the insurance claim. Normally, insurance companies undertake extensive enquiries before releasing the payment attributable to such damage. Furthermore, with the appellant having complied with all the procedural requirements, the insistence upon unavailable records does not appear to be a proper and legal disposal of the claim. 7. It would appear, from a perusal of the impugned order, that the competent authority has proceeded to dispose of the claim as a claim for refund would have been. The principle of remission enshrined in Rule 21 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 is an acknowledgement of duty liability that crystalizes on completion of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
