https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86017 Duty demand based on alleged excess production and Sunday production could not be finally affirmed because the material on record was not properly examined, including electricity restrictions, production incentive records, and the statutory scheme for the relevant production week. The findings on clandestine removal were considered too sketchy, so the demand required fresh adjudication and redetermination after a proper hearing. Confiscation of excess stock and the fine in lieu of confiscation were not interfered with, as no sufficient ground was shown to disturb that part of the order. The matter was thus reopened only on the duty demand, while the confiscation portion remained undisturbed. en-us Tue, 08 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Aug 2011 16:11:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86017 Duty demand based on alleged excess production and Sunday production could not be finally affirmed because the material on record was not properly examined, including electricity restrictions, production incentive records, and the statutory scheme for the relevant production week. The findings on clandestine removal were considered too sketchy, so the demand required fresh adjudication and redetermination after a proper hearing. Confiscation of excess stock and the fine in lieu of confiscation were not interfered with, as no sufficient ground was shown to disturb that part of the order. The matter was thus reopened only on the duty demand, while the confiscation portion remained undisturbed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 08 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86017