Judgment : R.K. Gulati, J. 1. THE Commissioner of Income-tax, Allahabad, through this application has desired that under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, be directed to draw up a statement of the case and refer the following two questions which are said to be questions of law, to this court for its opinion : "(1) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is justified to uphold the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue in spite of the fact that there was no control over the sale price and the sales were not verifiable and the estimate of sales at 21/2 times of the licence money and the application of net profit rate at 9 per cent. was based on the finding of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in the case of Sri Madan Mohan Prasad v. ITO in I. T. A. No. 2281 (All)/1976-77 for the assessment year 1973-74 vide order dated April 27, 1978 ? (2) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in dismissing the appeal of the Revenue in spite of the fact that in the case of A.P. Singh v. Abdul Rehman and Brothers, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal vide order dated September 17, 1991, in I.T.A. No. 1379(All)/ 1988 for the assessment year 1986-87 dismissed the assessee's appeal and upheld the estimate of sales at 21/2 times of the licence fee and application of net profit rate of 5 per cent on estimated sales ?" 2. IN respect of the assessment year 1975-76, the assessee filed its return-declaring a loss of Rs. 2,42,589. The initial assessment which was made at Rs. 1,60,000 by estimating the sales at Rs. 30 lakhs and applying the net profit of 5 per cent., was set aside in appeal by the Commissioner of INcome-tax (Appeals) with the direction to make the assessment afresh after taking into account the evidence produced by the assessee. It may be observed that during the previous year relevant to the assessment year in dispute the assessee was a country liquor contractor and had 31 liquor shops at different places. In the remand proceedings, the Income-tax Officer once again rejected the account books of the assessee for the reasons stated in his order and worked out the net profit at Rs. 4,47,480 and in doing so, he estimated the sales at Rs. In the remand proceedings, the Income-tax Officer once again rejected the account books of the assessee for the reasons stated in his order and worked out the net profit at Rs. 4,47,480 and in doing so, he estimated the sales at Rs. 49,72,000 and applied a net profit rate of 9 per cent. thereon. The sales were estimated at 2.5 times of licence money which was Rs. 19,88,950. In taking this view, the Income-tax Officer referred to a decision of the Income-tax Tribunal in the case of Sri Madan Mohan Prasad v. YTO in I. T. A. No. 2281 (All)/ 1976/77, for the assessment year 1973-74, in which, it was allegedly held that in the cases of country liquor contractors where proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 145 of the Act is invoked, the sales are generally estimated 2-3 times the licence money and net rate of profit is applied. 3. THE assessee went in appeal against the assessment order where the additions made to the returned income were deleted and the Income-tax Officer was directed to accept the book version. Against the appellate order, the Revenue preferred a second appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, but without any success. Thereafter, the Revenue made an application under Section 256(1) of the Act for reference of the aforesaid questions to this court, which was also rejected by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hence, this application seeking directions from this court as already indicated hereinabove. 4. WE have heard learned counsel for the parties. The only submission which was made by learned standing counsel on behalf of the Revenue was that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was not justified in departing from its own view which was said to have been taken by it in similar matters to which reference has been made in the questions set out earlier. The copies of the orders of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in those matters were not made available to us, nor have they been brought on record. In the absence of those orders it is difficult for this court to express any opinion as to the relevance of those decisions on the facts of the instant case. The copies of the orders of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in those matters were not made available to us, nor have they been brought on record. In the absence of those orders it is difficult for this court to express any opinion as to the relevance of those decisions on the facts of the instant case. It has already been observed that the Income-tax Officer in making the assessment had referred to a decision of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in I. T. A. No. 2281/(All)/ 1976-77, in the matter of Madan Mohan Prasad (supra), but it appears that the said order of the Appellate Tribunal was not even available to the Income-tax Officer and he seems to have relied upon that decision without looking into that order for himself. It is evident from the office Note-3 set out at the bottom of the assessment order dated March 5, 1986, which reads as under ; "3. Several letters were sent to the Income-tax Officer, "E" Ward, Circle I, Varanasi, and D. R. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, requesting them to send to me a copy of the Tribunal's order referred to in the body of the order. But no reply was received. Thus, relying on the observations of the learned Inspecting Assistant Commissioner in his letter C. No. 9/144B of 1978-79, dated August 17, 1978, the assessment has been completed." 5. FROM the order passed in appeal by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal there is no indication that the Revenue had sought reliance on the order to which reference was made in the assessment order. It is settled that the decision in a case is rendered on its own facts. It is the ratio decidendi that may be relied upon as a precedent in another case, but it must be shown that the decision relied upon applies to the facts obtaining in a given case. On the facts of the instant case, no such attempt was made and a mere reference to some earlier decision of the Tribunal in certain other matters not pertaining to the assessee was of no consequence and could not have been relied upon. 6. THAT apart, the book version of the assessee was accepted by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and thereafter by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal on the facts found by those authorities on appreciation of evidence that had been adduced on record. 6. THAT apart, the book version of the assessee was accepted by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and thereafter by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal on the facts found by those authorities on appreciation of evidence that had been adduced on record. The appellate authorities have recorded a categorical finding of fact that the entire sales and purchases of the assessee were verified and it had kept complete accounts. The first appellate authority has held that the impugned assessment was made without verifying the facts that were placed on record and in an attempt to somehow reject the account books, which was unfair on the part of the Income-tax Officer. The assessee had successfully proved to the satisfaction of the appellate authority the reasons for which the gross profit was less in the year in dispute by giving comparable figures. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal while dealing with the book result of the assessee has remarked in its appellate order as under : "In our opinion, when the quantity sold and the selling rate both are available, which are duly certified by the Excise Department, there could be hardly any justification for estimating the sales on the basis of lease money. Such an estimate may be permissible when the quantity sold or the rate of sale is not available. With regard to expenses, we find from the profit and loss account of the assessee placed at para 9 of the paper book filed before us that the total expenses apart from the purchases amounted to Rs. 17,37,288 out of which the sum of Rs. 16,32,453, is in respect of lease money paid to the Government. The other expenses for the whole year remain only Rs. 1,05,035. The assessee was having 31 shops for sale of liquor. Looking to the number of shops, the expenses claimed seem most reasonable to us. Now turning to the salary expenses and shop rent it was specifically pointed out by the .... these expenses are claimed at Rs. 54,000 and Rs. 12,600, respectively. The details of salary paid person-wise is filed by the assessee and placed at page 37 of the paper book. From this, we find that the salary is paid to 39 persons out of which only one person was paid the salary of Rs. 500 p.m., two persons at Rs. 200 p.m. and the remaining 36 persons at only Rs. 100 per month. From this, we find that the salary is paid to 39 persons out of which only one person was paid the salary of Rs. 500 p.m., two persons at Rs. 200 p.m. and the remaining 36 persons at only Rs. 100 per month. Similarly, the details of rent is also filed at page 38 of the paper book. We find that the rent paid for the different shops varied between Rs. 10 to Rs. 100 p.m. In our opinion, the expenses claimed are reasonable." The findings of fact recorded by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal have not been challenged in the questions proposed in the reference application. In these circumstances, when the sales and purchases were found verifiable and so also the expenditure claimed, there seems no justification to make the assessment in disregard of the book version. The plea that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal should have adhered to its earlier decision, directing the assessment by application of net rate on estimated turnover, cannot be accepted. The question of estimate could, only arise when the books were not found reliable as contemplated under the first proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 145 or under Sub-section (2) of that section. No such situation arises in the instant case. 7. IN view of the above discussion, in our opinion, the questions sought to be referred do not arise from the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and in any case the said order is concluded by findings of fact. The application is, accordingly, rejected.