<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2016 (11) TMI 267 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334249</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal against the Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhopal&#039;s order demanding duty on unaccounted production and clearance of MS ingots. The decision emphasized the lack of evidence supporting clandestine manufacture and clearance, noting no discrepancies in stock or direct proof of wrongdoing. Expert analysis on power consumption patterns discredited the Revenue&#039;s claims, highlighting legitimate electricity use beyond ingot production. Relying on legal precedents, the Tribunal concluded that excessive power consumption alone was insufficient to uphold charges without corroborating evidence, ultimately upholding the impugned order and dropping the duty demand against the respondent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2017 13:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=447035" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 267 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334249</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal against the Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhopal&#039;s order demanding duty on unaccounted production and clearance of MS ingots. The decision emphasized the lack of evidence supporting clandestine manufacture and clearance, noting no discrepancies in stock or direct proof of wrongdoing. Expert analysis on power consumption patterns discredited the Revenue&#039;s claims, highlighting legitimate electricity use beyond ingot production. Relying on legal precedents, the Tribunal concluded that excessive power consumption alone was insufficient to uphold charges without corroborating evidence, ultimately upholding the impugned order and dropping the duty demand against the respondent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334249</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>