Demand of duty and Levy of penalty - Levy of penalty on Director ...

Electronic Evidence Admissible; Demand Confirmed, Penalties on Directors Set Aside Due to Lack of Involvement.

April 8, 2024

Case Laws Central Excise AT

Demand of duty and Levy of penalty - Levy of penalty on Director - Clandestine removal - The demand was based on data printouts retrieved from a third party's computer, which the Appellant contested, citing procedural irregularities. However, the Tribunal found the electronic evidence admissible as it was certified by the Forensic Department. Additionally, the Appellant failed to provide evidence to counter the allegations, leading to the confirmation of the demand. Regarding the imposition of penalties on the directors, the Tribunal noted the lack of personal involvement and shifted the burden of proof to the Appellant. As there was no evidence implicating the directors, the penalties were set aside.

View Source

← Previous Next →

Demand of duty and Levy of penalty - Levy of penalty on Director ...

Electronic Evidence Admissible; Demand Confirmed, Penalties on Directors Set Aside Due to Lack of Involvement.

April 8, 2024

Case Laws Central Excise AT

You may also like:

Clandestine removal demand based on electricity consumption not sustainable as mere electricity consumption cannot be the sole basis for determining duty liability....

Valuation - third party inspection charges cannot be included in transaction value - Supreme Court held cost of transportation from place of removal to delivery excluded...

Confiscation of imported liquor cases, imposition of penalties, and demand of duty. The Tribunal held that there was no intentional misdeclaration or fraudulent intent...

Service tax demand on Goods Transport Agency (GTA) services rendered on reverse charge basis set aside as appellant did not collect service tax from service recipient....

Clandestine removal of goods denied CENVAT credit. Liability for duty, interest, and penalty from FY 2007-08 to 2011-12 assessed. Differential duty demand of Rs....

The CESTAT set aside the demand and penalties imposed on the grounds of alleged clandestine removal, holding that the charge was not substantiated by sufficient evidence....

Liability to pay service tax for services provided to a foreign entity. The appellant argued that their turnover within the domestic market was below the threshold...

The case involved the classification of imported consignments u/s CTH 5903 or CTH 5407. CESTAT held that goods were not classifiable u/s CTH 54071094. No...

Penalty for non deduction of tax at source - bona fide belief proved - penalty set aside - AT

Penalty imposed u/s 114(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 for alleged abetment of illegal export by arranging lorries. Lack of admissible evidence showing knowledge of goods...

Clandestine manufacture and clearance of Sponge Iron alleged - undervaluation demand calculated based on seized documents - retraction of statements - Section 9D of...

CESTAT ALLAHABAD held that the Appellant is entitled to benefit u/s Rule 6(3A) of CCR, 2004 even if the option wasn't initially exercised. Service tax on logistic...

CESTAT examined service tax recovery with interest and penalties concerning insurance commission, finance payouts, and MUL incentives. The appellant had already paid...

Clandestine manufacture and removal allegation - substantial electricity consumption cited as evidence - no other corroborative evidence found - Revenue failed to rebut...

The demand for recovery of Cenvat Credit was made without proper verification and investigation, based on assumptions and presumptions. The investigation covered only 67...

Quick Updates: