The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) Bench at Kolkata has set aside the excise duty demand against clandestine removal of goods based on computer printouts and private records. It was submitted that

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

The Kolkata Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has set aside the demand of penalty and interest raised against an unsustainable excise duty demand. Based on intelligence, the officers of

The Allahabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), upheld the penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 on the proof that sufficient evidences adduced to allege clandestine

            Charge for clandestine removal cannot be confirmed without cogent evidence or on the basis of third-party documents, holds the Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi.             The appellant, M/s  Shree Rolling

In M/s. Golden Tobacco Ltd. & Anr. vs. CGST, the Delhi Bench of the Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that no penalty can be imposed under Rule 209A of the Central

The Kolkata bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), held that the charge of clandestine removal was not sustained in the absence of corroborative evidence. The assessee, M/s. Scan Sponge Iron

A division bench of the Bombay High Court has held that the charges of clandestine removal cannot be confirmed on the basis of statement of a few transporters under the provisions of Central Excise Act,

The Chandigarh Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ) ruled that the serious charge of clandestine removal cannot be levelled on basis of mathematical calculation. The appellant is engaged

Duty Demand on clandestine removals based on the confessional statements without corroborative evidence is not permissible, the Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held as above. M/s Metal Gems,

The Ahmedabad Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT)  remands the matter of Clandestine removal of Chhakada back to Excise Authority as cross-examination was not allowed. Mr. Amal Dave, Counsel appearing on

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) quashed excise duty on galvanized zinc as there was no tangible evidence to prove clandestine removal beyond doubt. the appellant company are

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has recently set aside the penalty imposed for alleged clandestine removal of goods, as the penalties in two other common cases were

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT)reduced the penalty on clandestine removal from 1Lakh to 25000 purchasing goods without invoice/bill amounts to abatement for evasion of duty. DhanjibhaiBhikhabhaiRanparia, the

The Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), New Delhi presided by Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) has held that excise duty demand for clandestine removal based on third party evidence and quashed Demand