Clandestine manufacture allegations require credible evidence; projected production figures alone cannot sustain fiscal adjudication.

Allegations of clandestine manufacture or removal must be supported by credible evidence; projected production figures alone are insufficient to sustain a fiscal adjudication. Where the Revenue relies only on estimates furnished to the electricity board and produces no material proving unaccounted production or clearance, the burden of proof is not discharged. The adjudication was therefore unsustainable, and the appellate relief quashing it remained undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand and adjudication could be sustained on the basis of projected production figures without cogent evidence of clandestine manufacture or removal.

Analysis: The adjudication rested only on projected figures furnished to the electricity board. No credible material established unaccounted manufacture or clandestine clearance. In fiscal proceedings, suspicion, however strong, cannot take the place of proof, and the burden remained on the Revenue to substantiate the allegation.

Conclusion: The adjudication order was unsustainable and the challenge by the Revenue failed.

Final Conclusion: The appeal was dismissed, and the relief granted by the appellate authority quashing the adjudication was left undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: Allegations of clandestine manufacture or removal must be proved by credible evidence, and an adjudication founded only on suspicion or projected figures cannot be sustained.

---