YASHWANT VARMA,J. - (1.) Heard Shri Praveen Kumar, learned counsel for the revisionist and the learned standing counsel.
(2.) This revision assails the validity of an order of the Tribunal dated 11 October 2007. The proceedings themselves emanate from a rejection of books and a consequential best judgment assessment which was undertaken. From a reading of the order of the Tribunal it appears that the premises of the assessee was surveyed on 7 September 2014. Although certain loose sheets of papers were found during the course of the survey, it is noted that all these transactions were duly recorded in the books of accounts. The Tribunal has further affirmed the findings returned by the assessing authority that the conduct of business by the assessee was in accord with reasonable and acceptable procedures and lines.
(3.) The sole issue which appeared to arise for consideration and enquiry before the authorities below was a discrepancy in the weight of mustard oil, rice bran and 'mauha' oil. The Tribunal has in its order noted that the assessing authority has clearly erred in arriving at a conclusion that certain purchases had not been accounted for in the books. It has also noted that from a perusal of the entire material before it, it could not be said that there was any intent to evade payment of tax. It notes that the books of accounts and other evidence maintained by the assessee clearly established that no adverse inference could possibly be drawn.;