Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (5) TMI 558 - CESTAT MUMBAIClandestine manufacture and removal - the demand was confirmed on the basis of variation in electricity consumption - case of appellant is that the test check of the electricity consumption was carried out not during the relevant period but much subsequent to the period for which the demand was raised, and is thus not relevant for the purpose - Held that: - merely because of variation in the electricity consumption between the actual consumption and the consumption arrived at on the opinion of some expert, the demand cannot be confirmed - The demand on the basis of electricity consumption cannot be confirmed particularly in the facts of the present case when it is clear from the calculation chart itself that in some of the months the production is coming short as per the calculation of the production on the basis of 600 unit PMT and in most of the months the production is coming on higher side. As regards demands raised based on kachcha chit, it is found that the demand was confirmed for the period 2002-03 to 2005-06 whereas kachcha chit shows the entry for the period 18.6.2006 to 27.6.2006. Therefore, this evidence is not relevant to the period of the demand in the present case, the same cannot be relied upon. There is no evidence on record which can establish the clandestine removal of the goods - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|