https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786756 A demand for central excise duty, interest and penalties premised solely on private records recovered from a third party and statements of that third party is legally insufficient where there is no tangible corroborative evidence (e.g., excess raw-material consumption, production records, transportation/receipt proofs, or receipt of sale proceeds) and where the assessee was not given copies of relied documents or an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses; consequently such demands may be set aside. Similarly, penalty liability under Rule 26(1) cannot be sustained in the absence of evidence connecting the director to clandestine manufacture once the primary demand is unsupportable. en-us Wed, 18 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Feb 2026 07:58:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786756 A demand for central excise duty, interest and penalties premised solely on private records recovered from a third party and statements of that third party is legally insufficient where there is no tangible corroborative evidence (e.g., excess raw-material consumption, production records, transportation/receipt proofs, or receipt of sale proceeds) and where the assessee was not given copies of relied documents or an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses; consequently such demands may be set aside. Similarly, penalty liability under Rule 26(1) cannot be sustained in the absence of evidence connecting the director to clandestine manufacture once the primary demand is unsupportable. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 18 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786756