https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123257 Additional excise duty on sugar under the Sugar Export Promotion Act, 1958 arose only when the notified export agency made a statutory demand and shortfall was intimated under the prescribed rules; absent both, the duty demand was unsustainable. Certificates issued by the export agency could not be ignored merely because shipping documents were not produced by the factory, since those documents were within the agency's control. The extended period under the Central Excise Act was unavailable because fraud, suppression or intent to evade duty was not established. Penalty and confiscation were also not sustainable, as the Act limited penalty exposure and did not authorise the confiscatory measures adopted. en-us Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Sep 2012 11:24:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123257 Additional excise duty on sugar under the Sugar Export Promotion Act, 1958 arose only when the notified export agency made a statutory demand and shortfall was intimated under the prescribed rules; absent both, the duty demand was unsustainable. Certificates issued by the export agency could not be ignored merely because shipping documents were not produced by the factory, since those documents were within the agency's control. The extended period under the Central Excise Act was unavailable because fraud, suppression or intent to evade duty was not established. Penalty and confiscation were also not sustainable, as the Act limited penalty exposure and did not authorise the confiscatory measures adopted. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123257