Clandestine production requires positive evidence; private raid records alone were found insufficient to prove removal.

Private records recovered during a raid are not enough by themselves; clandestine production and removal must still be established by positive evidence. Even where some material suggests an attempt to evade detection, the evidentiary basis must be sufficient to prove the alleged clandestine manufacture and removal for the relevant period. On the facts discussed, the material was found inadequate to sustain the Revenue's case, and the issue was answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether, on the basis of private records recovered during a raid, there was sufficient positive evidence of clandestine production and removal of goods for the relevant period.

Analysis: The Court held that even where private records recovered during a raid are supported by some evidence indicating an attempt at clandestine production and removal, the case must still rest on positive evidence establishing clandestine production and removal. On the facts placed before it, the evidentiary basis was held insufficient to sustain the Revenue's position.

Conclusion: The question of law was answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.

---