#CESTAT Appeals

CESTAT Ahmedabad sets aside penalties under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules 2002, ruling that statements alone are insufficient for imposing penalties without corroborative evidence and explicit invocation of the penal clause. The decision underscores the need for strict adherence to procedural safeguards in excise penalty proceedings, impacting manufacturers and corporate officers facing similar allegations.

CESTAT Ahmedabad has ruled that revenue authorities cannot sustain excise duty demands based solely on handwritten notes or unverified challans. The burden lies squarely on the department to produce concrete, corroborated evidence of clandestine removal-rejecting speculative inferences from incomplete records. This sets a vital precedent for manufacturers facing arbitrary tax assessments under the Central Excise Act.

CESTAT Kolkata ruled that when statutory documents are unavailable due to passage of time, actual production records submitted by the assessee hold legal precedence. The Tribunal set aside an excise duty demand of ₹73.1 lakh, reinforcing that tax authorities cannot rely on procedural lapses caused by delay to deny consequential relief to manufacturers.