https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=80303 Clandestine removal of excisable goods alleged based on statements recorded from partners, employees, and buyers. Section 9D of Central Excise Act mandates cross-examination of witnesses before admitting statements as evidence against appellant. Adjudicating authority rejected request for cross-examination, rendering witness statements inadmissible. Reliance solely on loose papers/dispatch chits insufficient to establish clandestine removal. Discrepancies and contradictions in evidence noted. Separate penalty on partners of firm impermissible per precedent. Demand and penalties set aside due to lack of admissible evidence proving clandestine removal beyond doubt. Appeal allowed. en-us Sat, 10 Aug 2024 09:04:11 +0530 Sat, 10 Aug 2024 09:04:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=80303 Clandestine removal of excisable goods alleged based on statements recorded from partners, employees, and buyers. Section 9D of Central Excise Act mandates cross-examination of witnesses before admitting statements as evidence against appellant. Adjudicating authority rejected request for cross-examination, rendering witness statements inadmissible. Reliance solely on loose papers/dispatch chits insufficient to establish clandestine removal. Discrepancies and contradictions in evidence noted. Separate penalty on partners of firm impermissible per precedent. Demand and penalties set aside due to lack of admissible evidence proving clandestine removal beyond doubt. Appeal allowed. Highlights Central Excise Sat, 10 Aug 2024 09:04:11 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=80303