https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782903 CESTAT set aside the central excise demand raised on the allegation of clandestine manufacture and clearance of goods attributed to the principal assessee at the premises of two other entities. The Tribunal held that the demand, based solely on data from a pen drive, was unsustainable as the mandatory requirements of Section 36B of the Central Excise Act for admissibility of computer printouts were not complied with. It further held that clandestine removal cannot be established on assumptions, presumptions or preponderance of probabilities, absent cogent corroborative evidence linking the entities or proving unaccounted production and clearance. Consequently, penalties on all noticees, including under Rule 26, were deleted and the Revenue's appeals were rejected. en-us Tue, 02 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Dec 2025 08:13:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782903 CESTAT set aside the central excise demand raised on the allegation of clandestine manufacture and clearance of goods attributed to the principal assessee at the premises of two other entities. The Tribunal held that the demand, based solely on data from a pen drive, was unsustainable as the mandatory requirements of Section 36B of the Central Excise Act for admissibility of computer printouts were not complied with. It further held that clandestine removal cannot be established on assumptions, presumptions or preponderance of probabilities, absent cogent corroborative evidence linking the entities or proving unaccounted production and clearance. Consequently, penalties on all noticees, including under Rule 26, were deleted and the Revenue's appeals were rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 02 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782903