ORDER K. RAVIRAJA PANDIAN, J. - The prayer in the writ petition is to call for the records of the respondent in TNGST 0540251/2000-2001, set aside the impugned order dated February 17, 2003 and further direct the respondent to examine the returns filed by the petitioner, grant a real and effective opportunity to produce the records to prove the correctness and completeness of the returns filed and thereafter call for the objections and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the provisions of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The petitioner is a manufacturer of leather goods and a dealer registered with the respondent. They have reported a total and taxable turnover of Rs. 18,32,070 and Rs. 1,62,435 respectively for the Assessment Year 2000-01 under the TNGST Act. When the matter was taken up for framing assessment, the petitioner was called upon to produce the books of account. The petitioner was not in a position to produce the books of account in spite of repeated requests and hence a proposal has been made on October 16, 2002 calling upon the petitioner to file objections to the proposal so made. The petitioner replied that in view of certain labour unrestment in the factory, the petitioner was not allowed to go inside the factory, which prevented the petitioner from placing the books of account before the authorities. But in spite of the reply so given by the petitioner, the best judgment assessment, which is impugned in this writ petition, has been passed. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the normal course of following statutory provision would be very onerous as a huge sum has been fastened as liability, not only bogus liability, but also a penalty which is over and above the tax liability. Now the petitioner is in possession of all the books of account in respect of the assessment year. If the books of account were verified with the return filed by the petitioner, the petitioner is having a fair chance of considerable reduction in the tax liability consequently the penalty also would be reduced. Hence the petitioner may be given one more opportunity to produce the books of account. He further contended that the reasoning stated that the labour unrestment which prevented the petitioner from producing the books of account has not been disputed or doubted by the authorities. Hence the petitioner may be given one more opportunity to produce the books of account. He further contended that the reasoning stated that the labour unrestment which prevented the petitioner from producing the books of account has not been disputed or doubted by the authorities. I heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials on record. Admittedly, the impugned order is the best judgment assessment made by the assessing officer based on his judgment in the absence of production of books of account. The reasoning stated for non-production is the labour unrestment, which has not been denied by the respondent. Hence I am of the view, in order to subserve the interest of justice, the petitioner may be given one more opportunity for production of account, of course on certain terms. When this was put to the learned counsel for the petitioner, he left the matter to the discretion of the court. Having regard to the liability of tax and penalty arrived at in the impugned order, I am of the view that the petitioner can be given one more opportunity to place the books of account to frame the assessment before the assessing authority on condition of the petitioner paying a sum of Rs. 1 lakh before the assessing authority. In view of the reasoning stated above, the following order is passed : (i) The petitioner is hereby directed to pay Rs. 1,00,000 (rupees one lakh) only to the assessing officer towards tax liability for the assessment year 2000-01 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. (ii) On such payment, the impugned order is deemed to be set aside and the petitioner is directed to produce the books of account and thereupon the assessing officer is directed to complete the assessment in accordance with law taking into consideration the return filed with reference to the books of account. (iii) If any one of the conditions is defaulted, the petitioner is not entitled to any of the benefits granted in this order. In that case, it is open to the respondent to recover the entire amount in accordance with law. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed.