Best-judgment assessment requires cogent material; unsupported kiln capacity enhancement and coal addition were reduced.

Books of account may be rejected where they are not maintained contemporaneously in the ordinary course of business or are withheld during survey without a cogent explanation, and that principle was applied here to uphold rejection of the assessee's accounts. At the same time, a best-judgment estimate must rest on supported material: where no convincing basis existed to enhance kiln capacity over the earlier year, the turnover estimate was reduced and the corresponding coal-consumption addition was scaled down. The revision was therefore allowed in part, with rejection of the books sustained but the estimated turnover and excess coal purchases reduced.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the books of account of the assessee were rightly rejected for not being maintained day-to-day or in the ordinary course of business. (ii) Whether the estimated turnover of bricks and the corresponding addition towards coal consumption required reduction.

Issue (i): Whether the books of account of the assessee were rightly rejected for not being maintained day-to-day or in the ordinary course of business.

Analysis: The books were not produced at the time of repeated surveys, and no cogent explanation was given for the absence of the manufacturing account and other relevant records at the kiln when manufacturing activity was in progress. These circumstances showed that the accounts were not maintained contemporaneously in the ordinary course of business.

Conclusion: The rejection of the books of account was justified and was upheld against the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the estimated turnover of bricks and the corresponding addition towards coal consumption required reduction.

Analysis: In the absence of cogent reasons for enhancing the kiln capacity over the previous year, the earlier capacity figure was accepted. On the survey material and the firing period disclosed, the turnover could reasonably be fixed at a lower figure, and the estimate of excess coal purchases had to be correspondingly scaled down.

Conclusion: The turnover was reduced to 4,00,000 and the excess coal purchases were restricted to Rs. 15,000, in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The revision was allowed in part by sustaining rejection of the books but granting reduction in the estimated turnover and consequential coal addition.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the accounts are not maintained contemporaneously or are withheld during survey without explanation, they may be rejected, but any best-judgment estimate must rest on cogent material and can be reduced if the basis for enhancement is not supported.

---