Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, in a best judgment assessment under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947, the Tribunal was right in reducing the assessment to the returned figures on the ground that the dealer was not given an opportunity to cross-examine the witness or inspect the seized accounts.
Analysis: The assessment was made under the best judgment provisions of section 12 of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 after the dealer failed to furnish returns on due date. The assessment authority relied on material indicating suppressed transactions and rejected the books of account. In a best judgment assessment, the dealer bears the burden of supporting the return, and the refusal to produce the seized accounts did not by itself amount to breach of natural justice because the dealer could have established his case by other means. The estimate of turnover was also supported by relevant circumstances, including the dealer's reputation and length of business, and was not shown to be arbitrary, vindictive, or capricious.
Conclusion: The Tribunal was not correct in reducing the assessment to the returned figures, and remand was not necessary for granting further opportunity to cross-examine witnesses or inspect the seized accounts.