Data Retrieved from CAs Laptop cannot be used as Incriminating Material against Assessee

The appellants are in appeal against the impugned order wherein the demand has been confirmed against them on the allegation of clandestine removal of goods, on the basis of statement given by Shri. Kishore Aggarwal one of the appellant here, and the data retrieved from the Laptop of Shri Lalit Aggarwal and Shri. Vikas Varshney, CA/ Accountant of the firm owned by Shri Kishore Aggarwal.

2. The facts of the case are that the main appellant is engaged in the manufacture of packaged drinking water in 20 liters jars under the brand name of Kingfisher, which is owned by the M/s UB Limited and not paying duty and clearing goods clandestinely. M/s Iceberg Foods Limited (IFL for short) and M/s Deo Pvt. Limited which relates to one of the appellant Shri. Kishore Aggarwal was given franchisee of kingfisher to which M/s UB Limited was supplying materials like capes, stickers and empty jars etc. to the appellants through their distributors. The case of the Revenue is that investigation was conducted at the end of M/s IFL and M/s Iceberg Aqua Pvt. Ltd. (IAPL for short), wherein incriminating documents were recovered and statements were recorded. On the basis of those incriminating documents and statements, the case was booked against all the persons dealing with M/s IFL and M/s
IAPL. The case is also booked against the appellants on the basis of computer prints outs recovered from CA/Accountant of M/s IFL and M/s IAPL, no investigation was conducted at the end of appellants except Shri. Kishore Aggarwal but the statements were recorded. On the basis of these computer printouts and the statement, the show cause notice was issued to the appellants to demand duty on the ground of clandestine removal of goods during the period April 2008 to June 2009. The matter was adjudicated, demand of duty along with interest was confirmed against the main appellant and penalties of all the appellants were also imposed. Aggrieved from the said order, the appellants are before me.