Confessional statement without corroboration was insufficient to prove unaccounted production; Tribunal's factual finding stood.

A confessional statement alleging unaccounted production did not, on the facts, justify interference where there were no private records, stock corroboration, or other supporting materials showing production or clearance beyond statutory records. The appellate finding that the adjudication order lacked discussion of the relevant material and that the alleged oil gain was not realistically established was treated as a factual conclusion based on the record. While a confessional statement is not devoid of evidentiary value, the Tribunal's conclusion required no interference because the Revenue failed to demonstrate any substantial question of law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Revenue's appeal could succeed on the basis of a confessional statement allegedly showing unaccounted production and whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the Commissioner (Appeals) for want of corroborative material.

Analysis: The finding under challenge was that the case rested only on a statement said to disclose 1.5% oil gain, without any private records, stock corroboration, or other supporting evidence showing production or clearance in excess of statutory records. The appellate finding that the adjudication order was not supported by discussion of the relevant material and that the estimated gain was not realistically established was accepted as a finding based on the record. The Court also noted that no authority had held that a confessional statement has no evidentiary value; however, on the facts of the case, the Tribunal's conclusion required no interference.

Conclusion: The Revenue failed to show any substantial question of law, and the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal was upheld.

---