Account books cannot be rejected on speculation alone when no evidentiary basis supports a turnover estimate.

Account books cannot be rejected on speculative or unsupported grounds. The revising authority relied on the absence of any record showing cash was taken home and brought back, and on an that a cash shortage may have been used for suppressed transactions. As there was no rule, commercial practice, or past conduct requiring such a record, the inference lacked evidentiary support. On that basis, rejection of the books and the turnover estimate were not justified, and the issue was answered in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether there was material to reject the assessee's account books and sustain the turnover estimate.

Analysis: The revising authority relied on the absence of a record showing that cash was taken home and brought back, and on a speculative inference that the shortage in cash might have been used for suppressed transactions. There was no rule, commercial practice, or past conduct of the assessee requiring such a record, and the inference drawn had no evidentiary support. The account books could not be rejected on hypothetical or irrelevant grounds.

Conclusion: The rejection of the account books was not justified, and the answer to the first question was in the negative in favour of the assessee.

---