Best judgment assessment sustained where seized records were manipulated and accounts were not verified from regular books

Manipulated seized records and unexplained alteration of seizure material justified a best judgment assessment, because the assessee did not verify the accounts against the regular books of account. On those facts, the High Court accepted the Board's findings, held that the assessment was sustainable, and found no substantial question of law arising from the appeals. The result was that the appeals failed on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessing authority committed error in making a best judgment assessment and whether the appeals involved any substantial question of law.

Analysis: The seized documents from the business were found to have been manipulated after inspection, including alteration of seizure records and insertion of diary and loose papers in place of original seizure material. The record also showed that the appellant had not verified the accounts from the regular books of account. In these circumstances, the assessment based on best judgment was upheld, and the Board's detailed findings were accepted.

Conclusion: The best judgment assessment was valid and no substantial question of law arose.

Final Conclusion: The appeals failed on merits and were dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where seized records are found to have been manipulated and the assessee does not verify accounts from regular books, a best judgment assessment can be sustained and does not give rise to a substantial question of law.

---