JUDGMENT K. K. USHA J. – Revision is at the instance of the assessee. Petitioner is running a business of jewellary. He filed returns taxable turnover of Rs. 12,26,207 for the assessment year 1988-89. The assessing authority rejected the accounts and completed the assessment by way of best judgment. Basis of such best judgment assessment was the suppression found during an inspection on May 20, 1988. The assessing authority estimated turnover at 2 1/2 times the average running stock and fixed taxable turnover at Rs. 30,77,234. On appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner reduced the estimate and fixed and same at 2 times the average running stock. He fixed the taxable turnover Rs. 26,21,786. In second appeal, the Tribunal affirmed the above finding. 2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant-assessee that the reason given by the Tribunal for sustaining the estimate at 2 times the average running stock in on no basis at all. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal should have sustained only the addition of the actual suppression, in view of the fact that there was no subsequent inspection. Therefore, the finding that there was a pattern of suppression is not sustainable. 3. The learned Government Pleader would contend that the Tribunal was fully justified in sustaining the first appellate authority's order. He submits that the suppression found on inspection was for a day and it is therefore substantial. According to him, no reduction shall be made from what has been assessed by the Tribunal. 4. We cannot agree with the stand taken by the learned Government Pleader that suppression found to the extent of Rs. 73,652 was suppression for a day. The inspection was conducted 50 days after the starting of the assessment year. We cannot also accept the contention taken by the assessee that only actual suppression can be added to the turnover returned by the assessee. The result of the inspection was as follows : "Stock variation : Excess of new gold ornaments : 25.240 gms. Shortage of old gold : 3.300 gms. Shortage of silver ornaments : 188.700 gms. Shortage of old silver : 242 gms. The result of the inspection was as follows : "Stock variation : Excess of new gold ornaments : 25.240 gms. Shortage of old gold : 3.300 gms. Shortage of silver ornaments : 188.700 gms. Shortage of old silver : 242 gms. Unaccounted transactions : Sales of gold ornaments : 16,035 Sale of silver ornaments : 496.50 Purchase of silver : 197 Purchase of gold : 47,383." The assessee had admitted suppression found as above and compounded the offence for an amount of Rs. 4,603. Therefore there cannot be any dispute that the suppression to the extent of Rs. 73,652 found out at the time of inspection has to be taken on the basis. It cannot be taken that there was no pattern of suppression merely on the ground that there was no second inspection. Taking into consideration the period which was over in the assessment year when the inspection was conducted and the quantum of suppression, we are of the view that the basis taken by the authorities, namely, that of addition to the running stock is perfectly justified. The only question is whether estimate is to be made 2 times the average running stock. Taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case we find that justice will be served if 1 1/2 times of the average running stock is taken. As mentioned earlier, the inspection was conducted after 50 days starting of the assessment year. The suppression was to the extent of Rs. 73,652. If whole year suppression is to be calculated on the above basis also we find that it will be equivalent to an amount calculated at 1 1/2 times of the running stock value. We therefore modify the order passed by the Tribunal estimating the turnover as 2 times the running stock value as 1 1/2 times the running stock. The revision stands partly allowed. C.M.P. No. 3655 of 1995 in T.R.C. No. 162 of 1995 dismissed. Petition partly allowed.