https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65664 Books of account could not be rejected under section 145 merely because electricity consumption differed from milling output, where the assessee maintained stock and production registers and no defect was shown in the books, stock records, purchases, sales, or accounting method. In the absence of corroborative material showing unreliability of the accounts or unrecorded transactions, a presumed suppression of milling was not justified, and the estimated addition on that basis could not survive. The consequential addition for estimated capital employed in the alleged suppression also failed. en-us Fri, 01 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Feb 2011 12:26:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65664 Books of account could not be rejected under section 145 merely because electricity consumption differed from milling output, where the assessee maintained stock and production registers and no defect was shown in the books, stock records, purchases, sales, or accounting method. In the absence of corroborative material showing unreliability of the accounts or unrecorded transactions, a presumed suppression of milling was not justified, and the estimated addition on that basis could not survive. The consequential addition for estimated capital employed in the alleged suppression also failed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 01 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65664