Earlier year yield figures need not govern a later assessment year when the relevant facts and claimed wastage differ.

For a particular assessment year, the Tribunal need not mechanically carry forward the yield or wastage figure accepted in an earlier year when the assessee's own case for the year under reference is based on different factual figures. The analysis turned on the accounting year's own production data and defects noticed in the accounts, rather than automatic adoption of the prior year's ratio. Where the record showed that the assessee did not itself claim the earlier wastage rate for the relevant year, the earlier assessment year's finding was not binding as a matter of course. The reference was therefore resolved against the assessee on the first question, and the second question was not answered.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was bound to apply the ratio of the earlier assessment year while determining the yield and wastage for the year in question.

Analysis: The assessee's case for the relevant year was that the wastage was 0.85%, and not 2%. The Tribunal had accepted the lower yield fixed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner on the basis of the accounting year's own facts, including the comparative production figures and the defects noticed in the accounts. The reference therefore turned on whether the earlier year's figure of wastage had to be mechanically carried forward, but the record showed that the assessee itself had not claimed such wastage for the year under consideration.

Conclusion: The question was answered in the negative, against the assessee and in favour of the revenue.

Final Conclusion: The reference was disposed of by declining to answer the second question after answering the first question in favour of the revenue.

Ratio Decidendi: A finding on yield or wastage for a particular assessment year need not follow the result of an earlier year where the assessee's own case for the year under reference rests on different factual figures.

---