https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773763 CESTAT Allahabad partially allowed the appeal challenging demands for clandestine removal, CENVAT credit denial, and undervaluation. The tribunal set aside demands totaling Rs 23,03,781 for alleged clandestine clearance of craft paper and Rs 74,827 for packing material, finding insufficient corroborative evidence despite recovered documents and statements. Demands for undervaluation (Rs 10,71,211) and GTA services CENVAT credit denial (Rs 3,19,176) were remanded for redetermination within normal limitation period. The tribunal emphasized that clandestine removal charges require independent corroboration and clarified that extended limitation period was improperly invoked for transactions reflected in ER-1 returns. en-us Wed, 25 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Jun 2025 16:15:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773763 CESTAT Allahabad partially allowed the appeal challenging demands for clandestine removal, CENVAT credit denial, and undervaluation. The tribunal set aside demands totaling Rs 23,03,781 for alleged clandestine clearance of craft paper and Rs 74,827 for packing material, finding insufficient corroborative evidence despite recovered documents and statements. Demands for undervaluation (Rs 10,71,211) and GTA services CENVAT credit denial (Rs 3,19,176) were remanded for redetermination within normal limitation period. The tribunal emphasized that clandestine removal charges require independent corroboration and clarified that extended limitation period was improperly invoked for transactions reflected in ER-1 returns. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 25 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773763