JUDGMENT 1. By this application u/s 256(2) of the income tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), the assessee, Ram Prakash Bhagwati Prasad and Ved Prakash, prays that the Tribunal, Allahabad, be required to state the case and refer three questions of law, formulated by it in paragraph 13 of the application, for the opinion of the Court. The main controversy, in relation to which the questions formulated by the assessee are said to arise from out of the appellate order of the Tribunal, centres round the question as to whether the Tribunal was, while making the best judgment assessment, justified in applying the profit rate of 7 per cent. While applying the said rate, the Tribunal took into consideration the past history of the applicant which showed that in the previous years its assessed profits were in consonance with similar profit rate. Before the Tribunal, the applicant placed reliance on assessments made in the case of various other persons dealing in country liquor at Lucknow (the commodity in which the applicant had been dealing) which showed that in their cases the assessed profits were very much lower than 7 per cent of their gross turnover. On behalf of the department, it was pointed out that in the case of a dealer in country liquor at Allahabad, his assessed profits worked out to about 8 per cent of his gross turnover. 2. The learned counsel for the assessee contends that the Tribunal committed a mistake of law in ignoring the exemplars of country liquor dealers of Lucknow, cited by him and in taking irrelevant material into consideration by relying upon the exemplar of a country liquor dealer of Allahabad district. This, according to him, vitiates the finding recorded by the Tribunal. 3. We find no merit in the aforementioned submission made by the learned counsel. A perusal of the order of the Tribunal shows that what it in effect finds is that neither the exemplars pertaining to the country liquor dealer of Allahabad nor those which concerned other country liquor dealers of Lucknow, could, in the circumstances of the case, provide a proper basis for assessing the profits earned by the petitioner. According to it, applicant's profits could properly be worked out in the light of its assessment in earlier years. According to it, applicant's profits could properly be worked out in the light of its assessment in earlier years. In this view of the matter, no question of the Tribunal either ignoring any relevant material or its relying upon an irrelevant material arises. The findings recorded by the Tribunal in this regard are findings of fact based on appraisement of material on record and they do not appear to be vitiated by any error of law. In the result, we are not satisfied that any statable question of law arises from out of the appellate order of the Tribunal. This application u/s 256(2), therefore, fails and is rejected with costs which are assessed at Rs. 125.