While hearing the case of M/s S.R. Ingots Pvt. Ltd, the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ) held that mere statements of the director which is inculpatory in nature cannot be
The Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal(CESTAT), Delhi bench has recently quashed an order confirming the charge of clandestine removal for lack of clinching evidence of clandestine manufacture and removal of goods. The Appellant
In the case of M/s, Mohit Engineering versus CCE, the Delhi bench of Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ) ruled that allegation of clandestine removal cannot be upheld only on the
The Pune bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that addition under VAT is not sustainable when the charges of clandestine removal cannot be confirmed without corroborative evidence. The Revenue challenged the
The Mumbai bench of Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal has held that third party records cannot form the basis of clandestine removal, unless corroborated by independent evidence. The appellant M/S Orange City Alloys
Delhi CESTAT while hearing the appeal of M/s G.P. Ispat Pvt. Limited against the CCE&ST, tribunal quashed the demand since the allegation of clandestine removal has been made only on the basis of alleged shortages
The Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Delhi Bench held that the burden of proof for alleged clandestine removal of goods is upon the department. The present order disposes of four appeals arising
The Allahabad bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), held that the charge of Clandestine removal is to be framed only on the basis of substantial evidence in favour of the
The Kolkata Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ) quashed excise duty demand thereby observing that mere factum of two set of invoices not sufficient to prove clandestine removal.
The Allahabad High Court refused to grant bail to a person alleged of clandestine removal of finished goods without issuance of any invoice, without payment of any applicable duties. The applicant, Chhaya Devi is the
The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Ahmedabad set aside clandestine removal of Zafrani Zarda and Gutkha on lack of evidence. An intelligence was gathered by the DGCEI, Ahmedabad that M/s Patidar Products
While considering a bunch of appeals, the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Delhi Bench held that the demand of duty on clandestine removal was not sustainable in the absence of corroborative evidence.
The Delhi Principal Bench of Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the demand of duty and penalty under the Central Excise Act is not sustainable by the third–party evidence. The
The Ahmedabad Bench of Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ) has held that clandestine removal cannot be established on the basis of a third party’s records. The appellants are engaged in
The Delhi bench of Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that cogent evidence is needed to establish a charge against clandestine removal and no penalty sustained under section 11 AC of