https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338604 Excise duty could not be demanded on an estimated quantity of manufacture derived from later-period ER-5 return data because no provision under the Central Excise Act, 1944 or the rules authorised such estimation. The demand also failed for want of prescribed norms and supporting examination of variations in inputs, labour, materials, power supply and plant conditions, leaving the assessment presumptive. In the absence of a legally sustainable basis and proof of clandestine removal, the impugned demand and penalty were set aside by CESTAT. en-us Thu, 29 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Feb 2017 11:21:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338604 Excise duty could not be demanded on an estimated quantity of manufacture derived from later-period ER-5 return data because no provision under the Central Excise Act, 1944 or the rules authorised such estimation. The demand also failed for want of prescribed norms and supporting examination of variations in inputs, labour, materials, power supply and plant conditions, leaving the assessment presumptive. In the absence of a legally sustainable basis and proof of clandestine removal, the impugned demand and penalty were set aside by CESTAT. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 29 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338604