https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272213 HC upheld best-judgment assessment against the taxpayer, rejecting challenge to the Tribunal's estimate of 22 occupied seats per bus (AO and CIT(A) had estimated 24 and 19 respectively). Court found some estimation permissible in best-judgment assessments provided it is rational and non-arbitrary; taxpayer failed to produce required information, compelling AO to invoke Section 144. The modest addition to declared income was sustained, as the appellant did not demonstrate that the Tribunal's approach was arbitrary or irrational. Decision against the taxpayer. en-us Mon, 11 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Oct 2025 12:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272213 HC upheld best-judgment assessment against the taxpayer, rejecting challenge to the Tribunal's estimate of 22 occupied seats per bus (AO and CIT(A) had estimated 24 and 19 respectively). Court found some estimation permissible in best-judgment assessments provided it is rational and non-arbitrary; taxpayer failed to produce required information, compelling AO to invoke Section 144. The modest addition to declared income was sustained, as the appellant did not demonstrate that the Tribunal's approach was arbitrary or irrational. Decision against the taxpayer. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 11 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272213