- (1.) THE only question raised in the instant appeal is that the books of accounts have been wrongly rejected by the assessing officer, Commissioner (Appeal) and Tribunal.
(2.) IT is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant that books of accounts could not have been rejected in view of the audit report and report of chartered accountants. Error has been committed by the concerned authorities and the Tribunal, while rejecting the books of accounts. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant at length. The reasons assigned by the Commissioner (Appeal) for rejection of books of accounts are that the appellant did not maintain the consumption register for stores, spares and consumables as well as for packing material. In absence of standard production and standard consumption of the raw material, the same is also not verifiable because the raw material is purchased in terms of tonnes, while the finished production has been shown in terms of meters. Hence, the Commissioner (Appeal) upheld the order passed by the assessing officer, rejecting the books of accounts.
(3.) THE Tribunal has also observed that it was not possible to verify the raw material consumed and the items purchased; -it was also not possible to work out the exact consumption of the raw material vis -a -vis production. It was also not possible to verify the expenditure incurred on taking the material. Hence, order passed by the assessing officer and the findings recorded by the Commissioner (Appeal) have been upheld by the Tribunal.;