Clandestine removal cannot be proved by production norms alone without corroborative evidence of suppressed manufacture or clearance.

A duty demand based only on alleged short production with reference to SAIL production norms could not be sustained as clandestine removal. The Tribunal held that a production benchmark taken from a large integrated producer could not be applied as an identical standard to the assessee without supporting evidence, and the Department had not proved essential indicia such as raw material consumption, electricity use, sale, transport, or other corroborative circumstances. Following its earlier view in an identical matter, it found the allegation unsubstantiated and held the demand unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether duty demand based solely on alleged short production with reference to SAIL production norms could be sustained as clandestine removal.

Analysis: The demand was founded on an assumed production benchmark derived from SAIL norms for ISO-certified units. The Department did not lead evidence on essential indicia of clandestine removal, such as consumption of raw material, use of electricity, sale of goods, transport, or other corroborative circumstances. The production standard of a large integrated producer could not, by itself, be applied as an identical benchmark to the assessee without supporting evidence. The Tribunal followed its earlier view in an identical matter and held that the allegation remained unsubstantiated.

Conclusion: The demand was not sustainable and the assessee succeeded.

---