Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the accounts maintained by the dealer could be rejected for alleged non-compliance with rule 26(14) and low gross profit, and whether a best judgment assessment was warranted.
Analysis: The dealer had not maintained the prescribed production-cum-stock account in form XXX, but the Court found that the surrounding circumstances did not justify rejection of the accounts merely because the gross profit was low or because certain pencil entries appeared in the books. No inflation of purchases, suppression of sales, or stock discrepancy was established. A best judgment assessment must rest on a rational basis and cannot proceed on suspicion alone. On the facts, the authorities had no adequate material to discard the accounts or to estimate turnover on a best judgment basis.
Conclusion: The rejection of accounts and the consequent best judgment assessment were unjustified and unsustainable, and the assessee succeeded.
Final Conclusion: The revision was allowed and the assessment orders were set aside.
Ratio Decidendi: Low gross profit by itself, without supporting material of suppression, inflation, or other accounting defects affecting true turnover, is not a sufficient basis to reject accounts or make a best judgment assessment.