CHANDRASHEKHAR, C. J.

( 1 ) IN this petition under sub-section (1) of section 23 of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, read with section 8a of the Karnataka Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1976, the two questions urged by the petitioner are these :

(i) Whether the assessing officer was justified in making a best judgment assessment of the turnover; and (ii) Whether the brass cradle manufactured by the assessee, could be treated as furniture for levy of tax.

( 2 ) THE Karnataka Appellate Tribunal has given reasons for upholding the best judgment assessment. The assessee did not maintain the manufacturing account showing the wages paid for labour. The reasons given by the Tribunal, in our opinion, is a good one. The Tribunal has also pointed out that while making the estimate of the turnover, the gross profit of 25 per cent was added to the cost of materials. The estimate of turnover made by the assessing authority was reasonable and does not call for interference.

( 3 ) SHRI C. N. Kamath, the learned counsel for the petitioner, contended that brass cradle could not be regarded as furniture. In our opinion, the Tribunal was justified in holding that brass cradle was an article of furnit

Click Here to Read the rest of this document