<?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>2026 (3) TMI 430 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787675</link>
    <description>Central excise duty demand for clandestine removal may be sustained where stock shortages are established through a panchnama conducted in the party&#039;s presence and records recovered from its premises show clearances exceeding issued invoices. Sampling and multiplication may be an accepted stock-taking method for iron and steel products. Third-party records, including a broker&#039;s notebook, require proper evidentiary admission; where the supporting statement is not admitted in compliance with section 9D, the record lacks the necessary foundation for demand. Penalty under Rule 26 cannot be imposed on a director where no excisable goods are confiscated, because the rule requires dealings in goods liable to confiscation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2026 13:04:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=889862" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (3) TMI 430 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787675</link>
      <description>Central excise duty demand for clandestine removal may be sustained where stock shortages are established through a panchnama conducted in the party&#039;s presence and records recovered from its premises show clearances exceeding issued invoices. Sampling and multiplication may be an accepted stock-taking method for iron and steel products. Third-party records, including a broker&#039;s notebook, require proper evidentiary admission; where the supporting statement is not admitted in compliance with section 9D, the record lacks the necessary foundation for demand. Penalty under Rule 26 cannot be imposed on a director where no excisable goods are confiscated, because the rule requires dealings in goods liable to confiscation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787675</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>