Hon'ble Prakash Krishna,J.
Heard Sri Shakeel Ahmad, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Amit Mahajan, learned counsel for the department.
The appeal is admitted on the following substantial questions of law:
"(i) Whether upon the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the claim of the appellant for remission of duty of molasses which were stolen and fail to appreciate that stolen goods are to be treated as lost and the claim and have been allowed on this ground.
(ii) Whether upon the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the claim of the appellant that loss of molasses stolen is condonable under Rule-49 of Central Excise Rules, 1954.
(iii) Whether upon the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal ignored to appreciate that theft of goods is an unavoidable accident and as such remission of duty should have been allowed by the authorized below."
The name of Sri Amit Mahajan be shown in the cause list as counsel for the department, whenever the case is listed next.
(Prakash Krishna,J) (Ashok Bhushan,J) Order Date :- 22.3.2012 MK/