Account book rejection cannot rest on survey non-cooperation alone; turnover discrepancy needed fresh scrutiny.

Failure to file returns, non-production of stock details, and absence of books during survey did not, by themselves, justify rejection of the account books. The stock register was treated as not a primary account, and non-cooperation at survey was considered a matter attracting penalty under the Act rather than automatically making the books unreliable. As purchases and sales were not found unavailable from the other books, only the discrepancy between turnover shown in the assessment chart and turnover disclosed in the books required scrutiny. On these grounds alone, rejection of the accounts could not be sustained, and the matter was remanded for fresh decision according to law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rejection of the assessee's account books and the consequential enhancement of turnover were justified, and whether the matter should be remanded for fresh consideration.

Analysis: Failure to file returns, non-production of stock details, and non-production of books at the time of survey were held not, by themselves, to justify rejection of the accounts. The stock register was treated as not being a primary account, and non-cooperation at the time of survey was viewed as attracting penalty under the Act rather than automatically rendering the books unreliable. Since the authorities below had not found that purchases and sales were unavailable from the other account books, the only remaining matter needing scrutiny was the discrepancy between the turnover shown in a chart during assessment and the turnover disclosed in the books.

Conclusion: The rejection of the account books could not be sustained on the stated grounds alone, and the matter was remanded to the Revising Authority for fresh decision according to law.

---