https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257891 CESTAT Ahmedabad held that clandestine removal charges against the assessee could not be sustained. The case relied primarily on buyer statements and computer printouts, which the Commissioner (Appeals) found to have weak evidentiary value. The statements of 30 persons were similarly pre-drafted, and investigating officers failed to comply with Section 36B requirements for computer printout evidence. Without adequate material to establish clandestine removal, duty demand could not be sustained. Since clearance value fell within SSI exemption limits, confiscation was unwarranted. The tribunal set aside the impugned orders and decided in favor of the assessee. en-us Wed, 04 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 May 2025 17:22:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257891 CESTAT Ahmedabad held that clandestine removal charges against the assessee could not be sustained. The case relied primarily on buyer statements and computer printouts, which the Commissioner (Appeals) found to have weak evidentiary value. The statements of 30 persons were similarly pre-drafted, and investigating officers failed to comply with Section 36B requirements for computer printout evidence. Without adequate material to establish clandestine removal, duty demand could not be sustained. Since clearance value fell within SSI exemption limits, confiscation was unwarranted. The tribunal set aside the impugned orders and decided in favor of the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 04 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257891