Clandestine removal demand based on electrical consumption was ...
Electricity use evidence challenged; cross-exam denied, violating justice. Tribunal rejected quantification formula, but Revenue calculated averages. Case law argument rejected. Remanded for cross-exam opportunity.
Case Laws Central Excise
August 7, 2024
Clandestine removal demand based on electrical consumption was challenged. Average electricity consumption for certain periods was calculated. Cross-examination of officials whose statements were relied upon was denied, violating natural justice principles. The Tribunal consistently rejected electricity consumption-based quantification using Dr. Batra's formula. However, in this case, the Revenue calculated actual average consumption without using the formula. The appellant's argument regarding applicability of case law was rejected. The appellant was denied the opportunity to cross-examine persons whose statements were relied upon, contrary to the High Court's ruling allowing such cross-examination. The matter was remanded to the Adjudicating Authority to provide the appellant an opportunity for cross-examination.
View Source