https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782907 The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal and set aside the demand of excise duty and penalties for alleged clandestine manufacture and removal. It held that the Department failed to discharge its burden of proof, as the SCN and impugned order were based solely on electricity consumption of the induction furnace, without any corroborative evidence such as excess procurement of raw materials, details of manufacture of finished goods, clearance, buyers, transport, or cash transactions. Relying on HC precedent, the Tribunal ruled that mere higher electricity consumption cannot sustain a charge of duty evasion. en-us Wed, 19 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Dec 2025 08:46:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782907 The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal and set aside the demand of excise duty and penalties for alleged clandestine manufacture and removal. It held that the Department failed to discharge its burden of proof, as the SCN and impugned order were based solely on electricity consumption of the induction furnace, without any corroborative evidence such as excess procurement of raw materials, details of manufacture of finished goods, clearance, buyers, transport, or cash transactions. Relying on HC precedent, the Tribunal ruled that mere higher electricity consumption cannot sustain a charge of duty evasion. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 19 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782907