Satish Chandra, J. - The principal question that arises for consideration in this reference is whether the estimate of the turnover made by the Judge (Revisions) was in law justified. The assessee is a retailer in foodgrains. He disclosed a gross turnover of his purchases at Rs. 21,161.32 and net turnover at Rs. 7,004.30 p. The assessing Authorities concurrently rejected the account books. The Sales Tax Officer assessed its turnover at Rs. 35,277.48 gross. On appeal it was reduced to Rs. 30,000/-. The estimate of the gross turnover of Rs. 30,000/- meant an enhancement of about 40 per cent from the disclosed turnover. The Judge (Revisions) accepted that account books disclosed some defects on account of which some enhancement in the turnover was called for. He, however, estimated the reasonable enhancement in the turnover not more than 10 per cent. He held that even by this enchancement the total turnover does not reach the taxable limit of Rs. 25,000/- and so the dealer was exempt.
2. Having heard we are not satisfied that the Judge (Revisions) committed any error of law. When the account books are rejected an element of speculation is bound to creep in at the time of determination of the turnover. The Judge (Appeals) fixed the turnover at Rs. 30,000/- on an estimate. Considering the nature and the defects found in the account books the Judge (Revisions) was satisfied with an enhancement in the turnover by 10 per cent. The defects found in the account books were that the account books were not found posted upto date at the time of survey. This was not a circumstance which cast a serious doubt about the genuineness of the account. If under these circumstances the Judge (Revisions) felt that an enhancement to the tune of 10 per cent would meet the ends of justice, we are unable to say that an error of law is committed.
3. We, therefore, answer the second question in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the department. In view of this answer the first question does not arise and is left unanswered. Since no one appears on behalf of the assessee, there is no order as to costs.