Best-judgment tax assessment upheld where independent consideration and alternate statutory remedy defeated writ challenge.

Best-judgment tax assessments were upheld where the assessing authority considered income-tax records, the Enforcement Wing proposal, the dealer's objections and personal hearing, and recorded independent findings; the Court held that such estimates may involve approximation if they are not arbitrary and have a rational nexus with the material on record. The writ petitions were also declined because an effective statutory appeal remedy was available under the tax statute, and the assessee was relegated to that remedy with liberty to seek condonation of delay and exclusion of writ-proceeding time. The impugned assessments were therefore not interfered with in writ jurisdiction.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the revised assessments made under best-judgment powers were vitiated because the assessing authority relied on income-tax records and the proposals of the Enforcement Wing without independent application of mind. (ii) Whether the writ petitions should be entertained despite the availability of the statutory appeal remedy.

Issue (i): Whether the revised assessments made under best-judgment powers were vitiated because the assessing authority relied on income-tax records and the proposals of the Enforcement Wing without independent application of mind.

Analysis: The assessments were made under the best-judgment provision. Income-tax records were not treated as wholly inadmissible, particularly where the assessee's own reporting was found to be contradictory. The assessment orders were examined and found to contain the proposal of the Enforcement Wing, the objections of the dealer, personal hearing, and independent findings by the assessing authority. In a best-judgment assessment, some approximation and guesswork is permissible so long as the estimate is not arbitrary and has a rational nexus with the material on record. The Court found that the requirement of independent application of mind had been satisfied.

Conclusion: The challenge to the revised assessments on these grounds failed and the issue was answered against the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the writ petitions should be entertained despite the availability of the statutory appeal remedy.

Analysis: The dispute arose under a tax statute, where the rule of alternate remedy applies with greater rigour. The assessment orders were held to be appealable before the jurisdictional appellate authority. The Court therefore found it appropriate to relegate the assessee to the statutory appellate remedy, while preserving liberty to seek condonation of delay and exclusion of time spent in the writ proceedings.

Conclusion: The writ petitions were not entertained on merits and the assessee was relegated to the statutory appeal remedy.

Final Conclusion: The impugned assessments were not interfered with in writ jurisdiction, and the assessee was left to pursue the appellate remedy under the tax statute.

Ratio Decidendi: In a best-judgment tax assessment, an estimate supported by relevant material and made after independent consideration of the dealer's objections will not be disturbed in writ jurisdiction, especially where an effective statutory appeal remedy is available.

---