https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248054 The appeal was allowed as the court found the confirmation of duty based solely on excess molasses production insufficient to establish clandestine sugar manufacturing and removal. The burden of proof was on the Department, which failed to provide substantial evidence linking the excess molasses to evasion of duty. Factors such as weather conditions and storage capacity were considered in the excess molasses generation. The judgment emphasized the necessity of concrete evidence to support duty demands related to excess production quantities in manufacturing sectors. en-us Thu, 08 May 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Jun 2015 15:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248054 The appeal was allowed as the court found the confirmation of duty based solely on excess molasses production insufficient to establish clandestine sugar manufacturing and removal. The burden of proof was on the Department, which failed to provide substantial evidence linking the excess molasses to evasion of duty. Factors such as weather conditions and storage capacity were considered in the excess molasses generation. The judgment emphasized the necessity of concrete evidence to support duty demands related to excess production quantities in manufacturing sectors. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 08 May 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248054