<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (4) TMI 955 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769041</link>
    <description>Electronic records retrieved from CDs and pen drives cannot be relied on unless the statutory conditions for computer-output admissibility, including the required certificate under Section 36B and compliance with Section 36B(2), are established. Statements recorded during investigation also lose evidentiary value where cross-examination is denied and the mandatory procedure under Section 9D is not followed. Clandestine removal allegations require independent, tangible corroboration such as evidence of excess production inputs, electricity use, transport, buyers, or flow-back of funds; electronic data and untested statements alone are insufficient. The stated result is that duty demand, interest, penalties, and the director&#039;s penalty were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Apr 2025 08:38:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=815539" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (4) TMI 955 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769041</link>
      <description>Electronic records retrieved from CDs and pen drives cannot be relied on unless the statutory conditions for computer-output admissibility, including the required certificate under Section 36B and compliance with Section 36B(2), are established. Statements recorded during investigation also lose evidentiary value where cross-examination is denied and the mandatory procedure under Section 9D is not followed. Clandestine removal allegations require independent, tangible corroboration such as evidence of excess production inputs, electricity use, transport, buyers, or flow-back of funds; electronic data and untested statements alone are insufficient. The stated result is that duty demand, interest, penalties, and the director&#039;s penalty were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769041</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>