Minor input shortage treated as accounting error, with no clandestine removal found on the Tribunal's factual assessment.

A minor discrepancy in input stock was treated as notional and attributable to accounting errors, not as evidence of clandestine removal. The Tribunal examined the accounting system, the overall volume of inputs used, and the surrounding stock position, including excess stock in other inputs during the same period. After correction, the shortage was only 0.24%, which supported the respondent's bona fides and the conclusion that the discrepancy was immaterial. On that factual basis, no interference was called for with the Tribunal's finding that there was no clandestine removal of inputs.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's finding that the alleged shortage in inputs was only notional or immaterial, attributable to accounting errors, and that there was no clandestine removal of inputs warranted interference.

Analysis: The Tribunal had examined the respondent's accounting system and the magnitude of inputs used. The shortage, after correction, was found to be only 0.24%, while excess stock in other inputs was also demonstrated during the same period. These circumstances supported the respondent's bona fides and indicated that the discrepancy arose from accounting errors rather than any actual shortage or illicit removal. The finding was one of fact, including a specific conclusion that there was no clandestine removal of inputs.

Conclusion: No interference was called for with the Tribunal's factual findings.

---