https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4531 Exemption under Notification No. 50/2003-CE was available only on proof of substantial expansion by increase in installed capacity of at least 25%. The claimant bore the burden of strictly establishing eligibility with evidence, but the record showed only replacement of old machinery with new machines, scrap of some old equipment, and no supporting proof before the adjudicating authority. The verification report finding no substantiated expansion was not effectively challenged. On these facts, the exemption was rightly denied and the consequential demand sustained, with both appeals failing. en-us Wed, 19 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 12 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4531 Exemption under Notification No. 50/2003-CE was available only on proof of substantial expansion by increase in installed capacity of at least 25%. The claimant bore the burden of strictly establishing eligibility with evidence, but the record showed only replacement of old machinery with new machines, scrap of some old equipment, and no supporting proof before the adjudicating authority. The verification report finding no substantiated expansion was not effectively challenged. On these facts, the exemption was rightly denied and the consequential demand sustained, with both appeals failing. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 19 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4531