JUDGMENT R.K. Gulati, J.
1. By means of this application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Commissioner of Income-tax, Meerut, has desired that a mandamus be issued to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad, directing it to refer the two questions proposed in this application for the opinion of this court which are said to be questions of law arising out of the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal.
2. In the assessment year 1982-83, which is in dispute, the account books of the assessee were rejected by the Assessing Officer on the ground, inter alia, that the assessee had not maintained any record for day to day consumption of the materials consumed in the manufacture of transformers and production of finished products. It appears that, on identical grounds, the account books of the assessee were rejected in the preceding years, including the years 1977-78 and 1978-79. The rejection of the account books in the earlier years was not sustained by the appellate authorities and similar applications for reference were rejected both by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal as well as by this court. The rejection of account books for the year in dispute was also not sustained by the Appellate Tribunal following its orders for the earlier years. The questions raised in the present application are similar to those that had been raised in the earlier years. It is not disputed before us that similar questions for the earlier years have already been rejected by this court being ITA No. 140 of 1987 (CIT v. Electra (Jaipur) Pvt. Ltd.) decided on September 10, 1987, ITA No. 44 of 1987 (CIT v. Electra (Jaipur) Pvt. Ltd.) decided on April 17, 1987 and ITA No. 143 of 1984 (CIT v. Electra (Jaipur) Pvt. Ltd.) decided on July 31, 1986, on the ground that the questions raised by the Revenue were questions of fact.
3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are not satisfied that the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal passed for the year in dispute gives rise to any question of law. Nothing was brought to our notice to suggest that the case for the year in dispute is distinguishable from that of the earlier year when the books of the assessee were accepted as a result of the orders by the appellate authorities. The net result of those orders, particularly the one passed for the assessment year 1977-78, was that the assessee had maintained its accounts in accordance with the system of accounting regularly employed by it and that further the accounted version of profit was wholly deducible from the books of account and records maintained by the assessee (see order dated July 31, 1986, on appeal passed by this court in ITA No. 81 of 1984). The questions, whether the accounts are reliable or not or whether the income, profits and gains could or could not properly be deduced from the method of accounting regularly employed by the assessee are essentially questions of fact. Following the earlier orders passed by this court mentioned above, we reject this application also. However, there shall be no order as to costs.