https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150664 Penalty proceedings under section 15-A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 required satisfaction that the assessee had concealed turnover particulars or deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars. Rejection of books and a best judgment assessment yielding higher turnover did not, by themselves, prove concealment or falsity in the return. The department had to identify the specific item said to be incorrect and support the allegation with material, so the assessee could respond. In the absence of such material, an adverse assessment alone could not justify issuance of a penalty notice, and the notice was held to be without jurisdiction. en-us Tue, 16 Apr 1974 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 May 2013 11:07:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150664 Penalty proceedings under section 15-A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 required satisfaction that the assessee had concealed turnover particulars or deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars. Rejection of books and a best judgment assessment yielding higher turnover did not, by themselves, prove concealment or falsity in the return. The department had to identify the specific item said to be incorrect and support the allegation with material, so the assessee could respond. In the absence of such material, an adverse assessment alone could not justify issuance of a penalty notice, and the notice was held to be without jurisdiction. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 16 Apr 1974 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150664