Sales Tax Revision: Books Rejection Overturned, Assessee's Presence Key

The revision under Section 11 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act involved the rejection of books of account by the Sales Tax Officer, leading to a turnover increase for an assessee in the brick manufacturing business. The Tribunal's decision was challenged, with the judge ruling that non-production during surveys alone was insufficient grounds for rejection. The Tribunal's failure to establish the assessee's presence during surveys or intentional tax evasion led to the unsustainable order being set aside. The case was remanded for reconsideration, directing the acceptance of the books of account as correct, with each party bearing their own costs.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to rejection of books of account on the ground of non-production during surveys.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to a revision under Section 11 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act against a decision by the Sales Tax Tribunal regarding the assessment year 1979-80. The assessee, engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling bricks, had their books of account rejected by the Sales Tax Officer, leading to an increase in turnover. The Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) partially allowed the assessee's appeal, which was further challenged by both the revenue and the assessee through second appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeal but partially allowed the revenue's appeal.

During the revision, the main issue raised was the justification of rejecting the books of account based solely on non-production during surveys. The counsel for the assessee argued that the rejection should not have been solely on this ground and cited relevant court decisions to support the contention. The judge emphasized that while the assessee is required to produce books of account during surveys, if unavailable, authorities should inquire from others present at the premises. Additionally, there should be a finding that non-production was intentional to evade tax. The judge noted that the Tribunal did not address these crucial aspects, failed to establish the assessee's presence during surveys, or any ulterior motive for non-production. Consequently, the judge concluded that the Tribunal's order was unsustainable.

As a result, the revision was partially allowed, setting aside the Tribunal's order. The Tribunal was directed to reconsider the appeal while accepting the books of account as correct. Each party was ordered to bear their own costs, and a copy of the order was to be sent to the concerned Tribunal as per Section 11(8) of the Act.

---