Introducing the βIn Favour Ofβ filter in Case Laws.
- βοΈ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- π Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws β


Just a moment...
Introducing the βIn Favour Ofβ filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws β


Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Don't have an account? Register Here
CESTAT adjudicated a case involving clandestine manufacture and removal of goods, finding critical evidentiary deficiencies. The tribunal invalidated electronic evidence from CDs and pen drives due to non-compliance with Section 36B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Without mandatory certification and corroborative evidence, the department's case collapsed. The tribunal set aside the confirmed duty demands, interest, and penalties against the company. Additionally, the penalty imposed on the company's director was quashed due to lack of substantive evidence. The appeal was ultimately allowed, emphasizing strict procedural requirements for electronic evidence in tax proceedings.