Sales suppression proved by seized records, with belated affidavits rejected and penalty sustained under the statutory scheme.

Materials seized during inspection were treated as establishing sales suppression, because the assessee did not discharge the initial burden of showing that the disputed receipts were only labour contracts or service transactions. Additional affidavits filed belatedly under Regulation 12 were regarded as an afterthought, since they had not been placed before the appellate authorities and were unsupported by earlier evidence. The penalty under section 12(3)(b) was also examined against the statutory slab, and the retained quantum for the relevant years was considered consistent with the Act.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Appellate Tribunal committed any error of law in upholding the finding of sales suppression, in declining to act upon the additional affidavits filed under Regulation 12 of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal Regulations, 1959, and in sustaining the penalty under section 12(3)(b) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959.

Analysis: The revision turned essentially on appreciation of facts. The materials seized during inspection were found to establish suppression, and the assessee failed to discharge the initial onus to prove that the transactions were only labour contracts or service transactions. The affidavits filed belatedly in September 1997 were treated as an afterthought, since they had not been produced before the appellate authorities and were not supported by earlier evidence. The penalty was also examined with reference to the statutory slab, and the quantum retained for the relevant years was found to be in accordance with the Act.

Conclusion: No error of law was made out in the Tribunal's treatment of the additional affidavits, the finding of sales suppression, or the penalty under section 12(3)(b) of the Act.

---