https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250710 A central excise duty demand based only on deemed production from electricity consumption and a third-party technical report could not stand because clandestine manufacture and removal must be proved by positive, tangible and corroborative evidence. The record lacked evidence of unaccounted raw material, transport of clandestinely cleared goods, sale proceeds, flow back, parallel accounts, or incriminating statements, while contrary departmental material indicated higher electricity use. The power-consumption methodology alone was held insufficient, and the demand was set aside. en-us Wed, 30 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Feb 2016 15:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250710 A central excise duty demand based only on deemed production from electricity consumption and a third-party technical report could not stand because clandestine manufacture and removal must be proved by positive, tangible and corroborative evidence. The record lacked evidence of unaccounted raw material, transport of clandestinely cleared goods, sale proceeds, flow back, parallel accounts, or incriminating statements, while contrary departmental material indicated higher electricity use. The power-consumption methodology alone was held insufficient, and the demand was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 30 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250710