https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280089 The Tribunal set aside the impugned Order, allowing the appeal by the appellant due to the revenue's failure to prove clandestine activities in the alleged production and clearance of Sugar and Molasses without payment of central excise duty. The appellant successfully argued against the demand by highlighting the incorrect application of yield ratios between Sugar seasons and financial years, supported by legal precedents and factors affecting yield variations. The Tribunal found flaws in the revenue's theoretical calculations and emphasized the regulated nature of Sugar and Molasses production, ultimately ruling in favor of the appellant. en-us Thu, 28 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Apr 2019 09:25:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280089 The Tribunal set aside the impugned Order, allowing the appeal by the appellant due to the revenue's failure to prove clandestine activities in the alleged production and clearance of Sugar and Molasses without payment of central excise duty. The appellant successfully argued against the demand by highlighting the incorrect application of yield ratios between Sugar seasons and financial years, supported by legal precedents and factors affecting yield variations. The Tribunal found flaws in the revenue's theoretical calculations and emphasized the regulated nature of Sugar and Molasses production, ultimately ruling in favor of the appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 28 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280089