https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756816 CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed the appeal against clandestine removal charges under Central Excise Act, 1944. The tribunal held that Section 9D mandates cross-examination of witnesses, and statements recorded without providing this opportunity cannot be used as evidence. Since the adjudicating authority rejected cross-examination requests, witness statements were inadmissible. The case relied solely on loose papers/dispatch chits, which cannot establish clandestine removal without authenticated supporting evidence. Revenue failed to prove the charges beyond doubt. Consequently, the demand and penalties on the firm and its partners were set aside. en-us Tue, 06 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Aug 2024 13:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756816 CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed the appeal against clandestine removal charges under Central Excise Act, 1944. The tribunal held that Section 9D mandates cross-examination of witnesses, and statements recorded without providing this opportunity cannot be used as evidence. Since the adjudicating authority rejected cross-examination requests, witness statements were inadmissible. The case relied solely on loose papers/dispatch chits, which cannot establish clandestine removal without authenticated supporting evidence. Revenue failed to prove the charges beyond doubt. Consequently, the demand and penalties on the firm and its partners were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 06 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756816