https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373931 The appeal was filed against the Commissioner's order that set aside a demand of Rs. 34,94,737 and confirmed a reduced demand of Rs. 23,14,649 along with interest and penalty. The discrepancies in figures between the Profit & Loss account and ERI returns led to the issuance of the show cause notice. The Commissioner found no evidence to support the activity amounting to manufacture, emphasizing the absence of a new product emerging from the modifications made by the respondent. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision, dismissing the department's appeal. en-us Wed, 16 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Jan 2019 07:36:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373931 The appeal was filed against the Commissioner's order that set aside a demand of Rs. 34,94,737 and confirmed a reduced demand of Rs. 23,14,649 along with interest and penalty. The discrepancies in figures between the Profit & Loss account and ERI returns led to the issuance of the show cause notice. The Commissioner found no evidence to support the activity amounting to manufacture, emphasizing the absence of a new product emerging from the modifications made by the respondent. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision, dismissing the department's appeal. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 16 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373931