JUDGMENT These tax revision cases are by the same petitioner who is a dealer in jewellery. The respondent is the Revenue. The matter relates to assessment years 1980-81 and 1981-82. 2. The assessing authority completed the assessments after rejecting the books of accounts and estimating the turnover at four times the average running stock. The main reason alleged was that there was an inspection of the petitioner's shop on 30th August, 1980 and that there were suppressions of sales on that day. For the year 1981-82, the accounts were rejected for the reason that when the Central excise authorities inspected the shop on 4th April, 1981, an excess stock of 105.7 gms. of gold was detected. The petitioner challenged the orders of assessment before the first appellate authority, namely, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The appeals were dismissed. The matter was taken up in second appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal partly allowed the appeals by fixing the turnover at three times the average running stock. Hence these revision petitions. 3. We heard Sri Abraham Mathew, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. We are not convinced that this Court should interfere with the order passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Intelligence Squad, Trichur inspected the petitioner's business place on 30th August, 1980. They ascertained the stock position of gold ornaments on physical verification. The physical stock with reference to the register was short by 8 items weighing 102 gms. The Intelligence Squad seized 9 account slips and a day book for further verification. On the strength of the statement given by the petitioner at the time of inspection the Intelligence Officer examined the account slips and day books. The examination disclosed unaccounted transactions to the tune of Rs. 7,15,247. In respect of assessment year 1981-82, when the Central excise authorities inspected the petitioner's business place on 4th April, 1981, they detected an excess stock of 105.7 gms. of gold. These irregularities were taken by the authorities below as sufficient ground for rejecting the petitioner's books of accounts. This shows that the authorities had sufficient acceptable legal evidence for rejecting the accounts of the petitioner. Once the accounts are rejected, assessments are to be made on the basis of best of judgment. The assessing authority fixed the turnover at 4 times the average running stock. This shows that the authorities had sufficient acceptable legal evidence for rejecting the accounts of the petitioner. Once the accounts are rejected, assessments are to be made on the basis of best of judgment. The assessing authority fixed the turnover at 4 times the average running stock. On appeal the Tribunal which is the ultimate fact-finding authority fixed the petitioner's turnover at three times the average running stock. In the above circumstances, we hold that the decision arrived at by the Appellate Tribunal is based on sufficient relevant materials and that no interference by this Court of the same is called for. Accordingly we dismiss these tax revision cases in limine. Petitions dismissed.