Revenue fails to prove clandestine manufacture allegations based solely on electricity consumption without corroborative evidence

CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appeal challenging allegations of clandestine manufacture and removal based on electricity consumption. The tribunal found Revenue failed to provide corroborative evidence beyond electricity usage, with no raw materials, finished goods, or manufacturing activities discovered during surprise search. Appellant's explanation that electricity was used for kiln fabrication was not rebutted by Revenue. Issues regarding CPU data seizure, email evidence, and statement retractions raised doubts about Revenue's claims. Since main demand was unsustainable, penalty on Director was also set aside. Appeal allowed on merits.

---

---

Issues Involved:

1. Allegation of clandestine manufacturing and clearance of goods by the appellant.
2. Validity of evidence and procedures followed by the Revenue.
3. Justification for the extended period for issuing the Show Cause Notice.
4. Imposition of penalties on the appellant and its director.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Allegation of Clandestine Manufacturing and Clearance:

The central issue revolves around the Revenue's allegation that the appellant continued manufacturing and clearing goods clandestinely despite declaring the closure of their unit on 06.07.2016. The investigation, initiated based on a complaint, led to the discovery of six trucks loaded with materials on 20.03.2017, which the Revenue claimed were finished goods ready for dispatch. However, the appellant contested this, asserting that the trucks contained scrap from kiln fabrication and installation activities. The Tribunal noted a lack of tangible evidence, such as raw materials or finished goods, during the search operation, which would typically be present if manufacturing was ongoing. The Tribunal emphasized the absence of corroborative evidence, such as records of raw material procurement, movement of goods, or statements from buyers, which are essential to substantiate claims of clandestine operations.

2. Validity of Evidence and Procedures:

The appellant challenged the evidentiary value of the documents presented by the Revenue, highlighting procedural lapses such as the seizure of the CPU without a proper seizure memo and discrepancies in the dates of document printing and signing. The Tribunal observed that the Revenue heavily relied on data from the CPU and emails, which were contested by the appellant. The Tribunal found the Revenue's evidence insufficient, as it primarily rested on assumptions and lacked corroborative proof of clandestine manufacture and clearance, such as excess raw materials, unaccounted finished goods, or transportation records.

3. Justification for Extended Period for Issuing the Show Cause Notice:

The Tribunal scrutinized the delay in issuing the Show Cause Notice, which was served on 26.03.2021, despite the investigation and forensic report being completed by 2018. The Tribunal noted that the Revenue failed to gather further evidence during this period to substantiate its claims. Citing precedents, the Tribunal held that such a delay renders the demand time-barred, as the Revenue did not take concrete steps to fortify its case within a reasonable timeframe.

4. Imposition of Penalties:

Given the lack of substantial evidence to support the Revenue's allegations, the Tribunal set aside the penalties imposed on the appellant and its director. The Tribunal concluded that the proceedings were based on presumptions without proper corroborative evidence, thereby shifting the burden of proof back to the Revenue, which it failed to discharge.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal allowed the appeal on merits, setting aside the impugned order and penalties due to the Revenue's failure to provide substantial evidence of clandestine manufacturing and clearance. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of tangible evidence and corroborative support in cases of alleged clandestine activities, which were lacking in this instance. Consequently, the appeals were allowed, with consequential relief as per law.

---