Best judgment assessment estimates stand when bona fide and rational, with no revisionary interference on concurrent factual findings.

The High Court will not ordinarily interfere in revision with a bona fide and rational best judgment assessment supported by concurrent factual findings. Where the books of account and returns are rejected and the authorities estimate gross profit on the basis of the nature and volume of business, the court will not substitute its own estimate merely because a different view is possible. The concurrent estimate of gross profit at 25% was therefore upheld, and no question of law was found to arise from the appreciation of facts.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court should interfere with the concurrent best judgment assessment fixing the gross profit rate at 25% on the estimated turnover.

Analysis: The books of account and returns for the relevant assessment year were rejected, and the assessment was completed on best judgment basis. The assessing authority fixed the gross profit at 40%, the first appellate authority reduced it to 25%, and the Tribunal sustained that estimate. In revision under Section 41 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, the High Court will not ordinarily substitute its own estimate for that of the assessing authority when the estimate is bona fide and rational. The authorities had considered the nature and volume of business and there was a concurrent finding on the factual estimate. No question of law arose from the concurrent appreciation of facts.

Conclusion: The High Court declined to interfere with the estimate of gross profit at 25% and upheld the orders of the appellate authority and the Tribunal, in favour of the Revenue.

Ratio Decidendi: In revision, the High Court will not interfere with a bona fide and rational best judgment assessment supported by concurrent factual findings unless a question of law arises.

---