TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal sets aside penalties under Central Excise Act due to lack of evidence</h1> The Tribunal set aside the demand confirmation and penalties under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act against the appellant. It held that the demand ... Demand and Recovery – SSI exemption – demand based on figures ad balance sheet submitted to Health Department – Held that - As in the present case no investigation was conducted by the Revenue in respect of procurement of raw material, manufacture and clearance of the goods regarding which demand is confirmed, as the demand is only based on the figures submitted to the Health Department for procurement of order in response to tenders, therefore, in view of the decisions relied upon by the appellant the demand and imposition of penalties are not sustainable hence set aside Issues: Appeal against demand confirmation and penalties under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act based on alleged suppression of production and wrongful availing of small scale exemption notification.Analysis:1. Background: The appellant, engaged in manufacturing medicaments, faced a demand of Rs. 1,61,96,088/- and penalties for allegedly suppressing production and wrongly availing a small scale exemption notification.2. Contention - Appellant: The appellant argued that the figures in the balance sheet were inflated to meet tender requirements by the Health Department and were not indicative of actual production or clearance without duty payment. They cited various decisions supporting their stance, emphasizing that demand cannot be based solely on figures submitted for other departmental benefits.3. Contention - Revenue: The Revenue contended that the figures in the balance sheet, submitted in response to Health Department tenders, were accurate and formed the basis for confirming duty demand.4. Judgment: The Tribunal noted that the demand was solely based on balance sheet figures submitted for tender purposes, with no evidence of actual manufacture or clearance without duty payment. Citing precedents, the Tribunal held that demand solely relying on figures submitted for other departmental benefits is unsustainable without corroborative evidence. As no investigation was conducted by the Revenue regarding production and clearance of goods, the demand and penalties were deemed unsustainable and set aside. The appeals were allowed, granting appellants consequential relief as per the law.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
