Account book rejection requires more than non-production at survey; absence of books alone does not justify best judgment assessment.

Rejection of account books cannot be sustained merely because they were not produced during survey when there is no material showing non-maintenance of accounts or any oblique motive. The assessment in this matter rested only on the books being unavailable at the time of survey, while the record indicated that the partners were absent and did not establish suppression or improper conduct. The Tribunal had upheld rejection without addressing the legal distinction between non-production during survey and actual non-maintenance of books. The matter was therefore remitted for fresh adjudication on the correct legal position.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rejection of the assessee's account books and the consequent best judgment assessment could be sustained merely because the books were not produced during survey.

Analysis: The assessment was founded solely on the non-availability of the books at the time of survey, while the record indicated that the partners of the firm were absent and there was no material to show non-maintenance of books or any oblique motive. The Tribunal had sustained the rejection without considering the legal distinction between non-production at survey and non-maintenance of accounts, and the matter required reconsideration in light of the correct legal position.

Conclusion: The rejection of the account books was not upheld on the existing reasoning, and the matter was sent back for fresh adjudication by the Tribunal.

---