JUDGMENT The judgment of the Court was delivered by K. SREEDHARAN, J. - Petitioner is an assessee to sales tax. He is a dealer in groceries at Karunagappally. The assessment year concerned in this revision petition in 1989-90. Assessee's account books were not accepted, as there were defects noted at two surprise checks conducted in his place of business. Accordingly, as against the returned taxable turnover at Rs. 28,27,609.95, the assessing authority fixed the taxable turnover at Rs. 36,19,620. On appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner re-fixed the taxable turnover at Rs. 31,63,180. Aggrieved by the decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, assessee took up the matter in second appeal before the Tribunal. Tribunal disposed of the appeal by order dated December 14, 1993. Assessee seeks to question the correctness of the decision rendered by the Tribunal. 2. As stated earlier, two inspection were conducted in the business premises of the petitioner. Discrepancies in the stock of various items were found on those occasions. Assessee admitted the irregularities found at the time of the second inspection and got the defects compounded by paying a sum of Rs. 216. Clear case of sale suppression was also unearthed at the time of the inspection. The Tribunal, after going through the accounts, came to a finding that there are sufficient reasons for rejecting the books of accounts. So, on the basis of the findings of fact entered into by the authorities below, it cannot now be said that the rejection of the books of accounts was improper or illegal. 3. The question that will arise for consideration is whether the authorities below were right in making the estimate of the taxable turnover. After rejecting the books of accounts, the assessing officer made an addition of 50 per cent towards omission and suppression to the reported sales turnover. An addition of 25 per cent was made to the reported sales turnover of taxable rice. An addition of 50 per cent was made to the reported sales turnover of non-taxable tea. The sales turnover of empty containers, tea chest and coconut oil were estimated at Rs. 8,000, Rs. 2,000 and Rs. 21,780 respectively. The purchase turnover of pepper was estimated at Rs. 1,500. On appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner modified these additions. An addition of 50 per cent was made to the reported sales turnover of non-taxable tea. The sales turnover of empty containers, tea chest and coconut oil were estimated at Rs. 8,000, Rs. 2,000 and Rs. 21,780 respectively. The purchase turnover of pepper was estimated at Rs. 1,500. On appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner modified these additions. In regard to the addition to the reported sales turnover of taxable provisions, he fixed 20 per cent instead of the 50 per cent adopted by the assessing authority. So also the addition to the turnover taxable rice was reduced to 10 per cent; addition to the reported turnover of tea was directed to be at 10 per cent; and the sale turnover of empty containers and tea chest were reduced to Rs. 5,000 and Rs. 500 respectively. 4. Even though the Tribunal came to the conclusion that stock variations were found in respect of taxable provisions and non-taxable tea at both inspections, they reduced the addition to 10 per cent instead of the 20 per cent fixed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. Virtually the Tribunal decided to have an addition of 10 per cent of reported turnover of taxable provisions. Direction for the addition 10 per cent to the sales turnover of taxable rice was cancelled. So also on the question of sale turnover regarding garlic, Tribunal directed the assessing officer to levy tax on the turnover garlic only with effect from August 29, 1989. Regarding the dispute on the turnover of chillies, peas, dhall and coriander, the assessing officer was directed to allow exemption from levy of turnover tax on the above items if it has not been exempted in the impugned assessment order. So also the assessing officer was directed not to levy turnover tax on the sales tax collection in respect of the turnover which is exempted from levy of turnover tax by virtue of proviso (1) to section 5(2A)(i) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. 5. From the above mentioned decision of the Tribunal, it is clear that the Tribunal went into all relevant aspects of the matter and came to a finding of fact that the books of accounts produced by the assessee are not acceptable and that best judgment assessment is the only feasible method. 5. From the above mentioned decision of the Tribunal, it is clear that the Tribunal went into all relevant aspects of the matter and came to a finding of fact that the books of accounts produced by the assessee are not acceptable and that best judgment assessment is the only feasible method. Pursuant to this finding, the Tribunal fixed the addition of 10 per cent of the turnover returned by the assessee. On the facts and circumstances of this case, the said addition is quite reasonable and legal. That addition is based on the finding of fact arrived at by the Tribunal. We do not find any question of law to be decided by this Court in this revision case. Accordingly, we dismiss the revision case summarily under section 41(3) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act. Petition dismissed.