Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2022 (10) TMI 803

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nsumables. It is observed that immediately when the fire took place the management of the appellant company has intimated to the concerned local authorities i.e. Police, fire brigade, excise department, insurance company etc., and these agencies have started their respective procedure immediately. Thereafter, the jurisdictional superintendent has visited the appellant s factory and recorded the punchnama. In the said punchnama the details were recorded about incident of fire and about the goods destroyed in fire. However, in the said punchnama, there is no mention about the allegation that the appellant have not taken any precaution to avoid the fire incident - the short circuit is a usual cause of fire in majority of cases, therefore, the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... /2022 - Dated:- 20-10-2022 - MR. RAMESH NAIR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri R.R. Dave, Consultant for the Appellant Shri Kalpesh P. Shah, (Superintendent) Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER The brief facts of the case are that the appellant are engaged in the manufacture of the excisable goods namely, hair oil, hair cream, hair dye powder, tooth paste, hand wash liquid, beauty fairness cream, petroleum jelly, hair conditioner/ shampoo, talcum powder etc. falling under chapter 33 of the First Schedule of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellant was also availing the facility of cenvat credit of duty paid on the inputs and capital goods under Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The appellant filed application for re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... llant filed the appeal before the Commissioner (appeals) who vide order in appeal no. AHM-EXCUS-002-APP-73/2021-22 dated 28.02.2022 upheld the order in original dated 04.02.2021 and rejected the Appeal of the appellant. Against the said order in appeal dated 28.02.2022, the appellant filed the second appeal bearing number E/10291/2022. 2. Shri R. R. Dave learned consultant appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the goods have been destroyed in fire accident which is a natural cause beyond the control of the appellant hence the condition laid down in rule 21 of Central Excise rules 2002 is fulfilled for the purpose of claiming remission of Duty. The fire accident was occurred on 30.04.2012 i.e. after factory working hours and t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lace the management of the appellant company has intimated to the concerned local authorities i.e. Police, fire brigade, excise department, insurance company etc., and these agencies have started their respective procedure immediately. Thereafter, the jurisdictional superintendent has visited the appellant s factory and recorded the punchnama. In the said punchnama the details were recorded about incident of fire and about the goods destroyed in fire. However, in the said punchnama, there is no mention about the allegation that the appellant have not taken any precaution to avoid the fire incident. I further observe that the insurance survey was also carried out by New India Insurance Company Limited. In the said survey report also, there i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... which were destroyed in fire incident. However, on going through the Rule 3(5)(c) of Cenvat Credit Rules, it is absolutely clear that the reversal of the cenvat credit statutorily to be made only after the competent authority grant the remission of duty, therefore, the contention of the learned Commissioner that they have not reversed the credit before remission is without any basis. 5. As per my above discussion and findings, I find that the appellant s case is clearly covered under the four corners of Rule 21 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 and the appellant is clearly eligible for remission of duty on the finished goods destroyed in fire incident. Hence, I set aside the order rejecting the remission of duty. 6. As regard, the other a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates