TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of The CESTAT, by majority, allowed the appeals, set aside the impugned orders and remitted the matter to the Division Bench for consequential orders. The Tribunal held that the Revenue failed to satisfy statutory conditions of s.36B CEA, 1944 for admissibility of computer-derived evidence: laptops and pen-drives were opened years after seizure, computer printouts were uncertified, and the Director's signatures did not constitute the required certification. Physical and digital evidence must independently meet ss.36A/36B; here the digital material, on which the demand predominantly rested, lacked evidentiary value. Insufficient corroborative evidence and failure to counter production-capacity assertions proved fatal to the Revenue's case.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
