JUDGMENT

Walsh, Acg., CJ.

1. We accept the statement of the income tax Officer as being really the statement of the case on which our opinion is invited. He tells us that he was not satisfied within the meaning of sub-section (1) section 23 with the assessee's return, and that he therefore issued a notice to them under subsection (2) and fixed the date for the hearing, fully appreciating that it was a judicial proceeding in which he could summon independent evidence if he wanted it, or obtain information for himself from such materials as the assessee chose to produce on the appointed day. The assessee and their representatives attended with their books and the income tax Officer told them that the wastage which they were claiming to deduct from their gross returns was more than it ought to be, and more than it was in their other mill, or in previous years in this mill. It is obvious that if a person has once already been assessed in respect of the profits of a particular business, and the profits suddenly show a decrease resulting from the same bulk of material, something has happened to create a diminution of the profits; in that respect the onus is upon the assessee not as a matte