https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205214 Central excise duty demand based primarily on estimated excess production from electricity consumption and allied material was held unsustainable where no prescribed norms or corroborative evidence supported the inference. The Tribunal's view that electricity consumption alone cannot be the sole basis for determining production and duty liability was not shown to be perverse, and statements relied on by the Revenue could not be used without offering the makers and investigating officer for cross-examination after it was sought. The High Court also noted that invocation of the proviso to Section 11A(1) was not supported by proof of misstatement, suppression of facts, or fraud, so the demand and penalties failed and no substantial question of law arose. en-us Thu, 09 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 27 Aug 2025 12:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205214 Central excise duty demand based primarily on estimated excess production from electricity consumption and allied material was held unsustainable where no prescribed norms or corroborative evidence supported the inference. The Tribunal's view that electricity consumption alone cannot be the sole basis for determining production and duty liability was not shown to be perverse, and statements relied on by the Revenue could not be used without offering the makers and investigating officer for cross-examination after it was sought. The High Court also noted that invocation of the proviso to Section 11A(1) was not supported by proof of misstatement, suppression of facts, or fraud, so the demand and penalties failed and no substantial question of law arose. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 09 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205214