https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157395 Excess stock found on inspection justified taxing the suppressed turnover actually detected, but an estimate based only on probable later suppressions could not stand where subsequent inspections during the assessment year showed no irregularities. The first inspection on 1 May 1979 disclosed suppression of Rs. 54,930, and that addition was upheld because it reflected the excess stock actually found. The further addition of Rs. 1,09,860 was deleted because there was no factual basis to extend the suppression estimate beyond the amount directly established by inspection. Revisional interference restoring the full assessment was therefore not justified to that extent. en-us Mon, 28 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Oct 2013 17:43:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157395 Excess stock found on inspection justified taxing the suppressed turnover actually detected, but an estimate based only on probable later suppressions could not stand where subsequent inspections during the assessment year showed no irregularities. The first inspection on 1 May 1979 disclosed suppression of Rs. 54,930, and that addition was upheld because it reflected the excess stock actually found. The further addition of Rs. 1,09,860 was deleted because there was no factual basis to extend the suppression estimate beyond the amount directly established by inspection. Revisional interference restoring the full assessment was therefore not justified to that extent. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 28 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157395