https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753002 CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appeal challenging clandestine manufacture and removal allegations. The tribunal held that retracted statements were not tested under section 9D of Central Excise Act, 1944 through proper examination procedures. No evidence showed payment transfers to appellants, and the case failed to meet Arya Fibres criteria for establishing clandestine removal. The allegations were based on assumptions without corroborative evidence, making duty demand and penalties unsustainable. The tribunal ordered refund of duty, interest, and penalty paid under protest, ruling unjust enrichment bar inapplicable. en-us Wed, 22 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 May 2024 08:32:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753002 CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appeal challenging clandestine manufacture and removal allegations. The tribunal held that retracted statements were not tested under section 9D of Central Excise Act, 1944 through proper examination procedures. No evidence showed payment transfers to appellants, and the case failed to meet Arya Fibres criteria for establishing clandestine removal. The allegations were based on assumptions without corroborative evidence, making duty demand and penalties unsustainable. The tribunal ordered refund of duty, interest, and penalty paid under protest, ruling unjust enrichment bar inapplicable. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 22 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753002