https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=84928 The CESTAT set aside the demand and penalties imposed on the grounds of alleged clandestine removal, holding that the charge was not substantiated by sufficient evidence. It observed that mere alleged recording of higher royalty payment by the franchiser, without corroborative proof of actual higher production, procurement of raw materials, sale proceeds etc., cannot sustain the allegation of clandestine manufacture and removal. The statements recorded behind the appellants' back and documents seized from third parties were held inadmissible without allowing cross-examination. Lack of clinching evidence regarding clandestine operations rendered the entire demand unsustainable, and consequently, the penalties were also set aside. en-us Fri, 17 Jan 2025 08:45:41 +0530 Fri, 17 Jan 2025 08:45:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=84928 The CESTAT set aside the demand and penalties imposed on the grounds of alleged clandestine removal, holding that the charge was not substantiated by sufficient evidence. It observed that mere alleged recording of higher royalty payment by the franchiser, without corroborative proof of actual higher production, procurement of raw materials, sale proceeds etc., cannot sustain the allegation of clandestine manufacture and removal. The statements recorded behind the appellants' back and documents seized from third parties were held inadmissible without allowing cross-examination. Lack of clinching evidence regarding clandestine operations rendered the entire demand unsustainable, and consequently, the penalties were also set aside. Highlights Central Excise Fri, 17 Jan 2025 08:45:41 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=84928