https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242462 The appellant, engaged in manufacturing HDPE fabrics and sacks, failed to account for 2280692 HDPE sacks in their RG1 register. Despite arguing that the excess quantity was related to job work and contesting the time-barred demand, the appellant's explanations were deemed insufficient. The Production Register provided was inadequate, and the appellant failed to prove manufacturing on a job work basis. The Tribunal ruled against the appellant, directing them to deposit a specified amount to halt recovery proceedings pending appeal, as they failed to establish a prima facie case or demonstrate financial difficulty. en-us Tue, 19 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Oct 2015 11:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242462 The appellant, engaged in manufacturing HDPE fabrics and sacks, failed to account for 2280692 HDPE sacks in their RG1 register. Despite arguing that the excess quantity was related to job work and contesting the time-barred demand, the appellant's explanations were deemed insufficient. The Production Register provided was inadequate, and the appellant failed to prove manufacturing on a job work basis. The Tribunal ruled against the appellant, directing them to deposit a specified amount to halt recovery proceedings pending appeal, as they failed to establish a prima facie case or demonstrate financial difficulty. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 19 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242462