https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437596 The case involved a steel rolling mills company appealing against an order for duty recovery on unrecorded production. Allegations of duty evasion on clandestine clearances led to penalties and interest under the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellant disputed the evidence, challenging the reliance on circumstantial factors and lack of direct proof. The judgment emphasized the need for concrete evidence in duty recovery, invalidating recovery based solely on energy consumption data. The lack of legal sanction for determining clandestine removal and insufficiency of evidence supporting duty recovery led to the appeal's success, setting aside the impugned order. en-us Tue, 28 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 May 2023 08:47:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437596 The case involved a steel rolling mills company appealing against an order for duty recovery on unrecorded production. Allegations of duty evasion on clandestine clearances led to penalties and interest under the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellant disputed the evidence, challenging the reliance on circumstantial factors and lack of direct proof. The judgment emphasized the need for concrete evidence in duty recovery, invalidating recovery based solely on energy consumption data. The lack of legal sanction for determining clandestine removal and insufficiency of evidence supporting duty recovery led to the appeal's success, setting aside the impugned order. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 28 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437596