Best judgment assessment requires relevant material; unsupported assessments were set aside and remitted for fresh disposal.

Best judgment assessment must rest on relevant material and cannot be sustained on assumption, suspicion, or an unsupported premise. In relation to assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77, the record disclosed no material supporting the income determined by the assessing officer, so the assessments were unsustainable. The revisional authority, acting under section 264, should have noticed that defect and granted relief by setting aside the assessments and remitting the matter for fresh disposal in accordance with law. The revisional order was therefore set aside to that extent, with a direction for fresh consideration.

---

---

Issues: Whether the best judgment assessments for assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77 could be sustained in the absence of relevant material, and whether the revisional authority erred in not setting aside those assessments and remitting the matter for fresh disposal.

Analysis: Best judgment assessment is not an uncontrolled power and must rest on some relevant material. An assessment based merely on assumption, suspicion or an unsupported premise cannot stand. For assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77, the record disclosed no material justifying the income determined by the assessing officer. The revisional authority, while exercising jurisdiction under section 264, ought to have noticed this defect and granted appropriate relief by setting aside the assessments and remitting the matter for fresh consideration in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The assessments for assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77 were unsustainable, and the revisional order was set aside to that extent with a direction for fresh disposal.

---