2007 (4) TMI 765 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Appeal under Section 11 dismissed, Tribunal's order upheld for assessment year 2003-04

Kapil Kumar And Brothers Versus The Commissioner Of Trade Tax

The revision under Section 11 of U.P. Trade Tax Act against the Tribunal's order for the assessment year 2003-04 was dismissed for lacking merit. The ... - Issues involved: Revision under Section 11 of U.P. Trade Tax Act against Tribunal's order for assessment year 2003-04.Details of the Judgment:Issue 1: Disclosure of sales and exemption claimedThe applicant was involved in the business of purchase and sale of various goods. The Tribunal rejected the books of account and enhanced the turnover due to sales made using duplicate bill books. The Tribunal estimated suppressed sales equal to the disclosed taxable turnover. The applicant claimed exemption on the entire disclosed turnover, stating it related to U.P. purchased tax paid goods or exempted goods.Issue 2: Arguments and submissionsThe applicant's counsel argued against the Tribunal's inference that the bills were issued from duplicate bill books. The Standing Counsel highlighted differences in handwriting, bill details, and the lack of disclosure of sources for suppressed purchases. The Tribunal's decision was based on the applicant's failure to disclose sources of suppressed purchases.Issue 3: Tribunal's findings and conclusionThe Tribunal found substantial differences in handwriting and bill details, indicating the use of duplicate bill books. The applicant was found to have maintained three duplicate bill books and incorporated them into regular bill books when caught. The Tribunal estimated suppressed sales at a lenient amount compared to the potential total. The Tribunal's inference of planned suppressed sales was deemed justified.Issue 4: Liability to tax on suppressed salesThe Tribunal held the applicant liable for tax on suppressed sales due to the lack of disclosed purchase sources. The Tribunal's decision was supported by the failure to prove the applicant was not an importer or manufacturer making purchases from unregistered dealers.Issue 5: Applicability of legal precedentThe Apex Court's decision in a similar case was deemed inapplicable as it concerned admitted purchases from unregistered dealers, not suppressed purchases and sales.ConclusionThe revision was dismissed as lacking merit. The Tribunal's findings regarding the use of duplicate bill books and liability for tax on suppressed sales were upheld. The judgment emphasized the need for fair and honest checking by tax authorities to prevent tax evasion.Note: The judgment highlighted the importance of maintaining accurate records and disclosing sources of transactions to avoid tax liabilities.