https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249532 The Tribunal did not uphold the confirmation of demand of duty against M/s. R K Polytubes based on excess electricity consumption alone, emphasizing the need for tangible evidence to prove clandestine activities. The case was remanded for quantifying duty and penalty liabilities based on findings, with the decision on penal liability for M/s. Fairdeal Agencies left to the Commissioner for further review. The lack of conclusive evidence regarding excess production and clearance weakened the Revenue's case, leading to the rejection of the demand based solely on electricity consumption. en-us Fri, 17 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Aug 2015 15:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249532 The Tribunal did not uphold the confirmation of demand of duty against M/s. R K Polytubes based on excess electricity consumption alone, emphasizing the need for tangible evidence to prove clandestine activities. The case was remanded for quantifying duty and penalty liabilities based on findings, with the decision on penal liability for M/s. Fairdeal Agencies left to the Commissioner for further review. The lack of conclusive evidence regarding excess production and clearance weakened the Revenue's case, leading to the rejection of the demand based solely on electricity consumption. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 17 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249532