Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 4]

Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

M/S Unique Core Pipe Pvt Ltd vs Cce, Meerut-I on 8 May, 2008

        

 
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
COURT NO.II
			            
                                E/Appeal No. 3038/06-SM

(Arising out of order in appeal No.76/CE/MRT.I/06 dated 13.6.06 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Meerut-I)

For approval and signature:

Honble Mr.P.K. Das, Member(Judicial))

1. Whether Press reporters may be allowed to see the
     order for publication as per Rule 27 of the
      CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the
     CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication
      in any authoritative report or not ?	

3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
     of the Order ?

4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the
     Departmental authorities?
______________________________________________________

M/s Unique Core Pipe Pvt Ltd                     Appellant	                                 
                                               (Rep. by Shri Rajesh Chhibber, Advocate)
						  
	Vs                                         

CCE, Meerut-I				        Respondent

(Rep. by Shri B.S. Suhag, DR) Coram: Honble Mr P.K. Das, Member(Judicial) Date of Hearing: 8.5.08 Order No. /2008-SM(BR) Per P.K. Das:

Heard both the sides and perused the record.

2. There was fire in the appellants factory on 3rd June, 2002 which destroyed the finished goods as well as raw material.

3. The Appellants filed Application for remission of duty on the goods destroyed by fire accident. Show Cause Notice was issued proposing demand of duty on the quantity of goods destroyed by fire. The learned Advocate on behalf of the Appellants submits that the Tribunal vide Final Order No. 1852/07-SM dated 4th December, 2007 allowed the Remission Application.

4. In view of the decision of the Tribunal, the demand of duty is not sustainable. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside. The Appeal is allowed with consequential relief. (Order dictated and pronounced in the open Court).


	
								     (P.K. Das)
MPS*							                Member(Judicial)