https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158070 Revision under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act could not disturb the 1987-88 addition because the Tribunal's reduction to 2 per cent of returned turnover reflected the inspection discrepancy and surrounding facts, with no legal error or arbitrariness established. For 1988-89, stock supported by vouchers and excise seals could not be treated as suppressed stock, while the remaining discrepancy was too small relative to total stock to justify its full addition as unaccounted turnover. The best-judgment estimate was therefore excessive and arbitrary; the assessment was set aside for fresh determination of taxable turnover. Stock variation must have a rational and proportionate connection with suppression proved on inspection. en-us Wed, 23 Nov 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Oct 2013 18:37:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158070 Revision under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act could not disturb the 1987-88 addition because the Tribunal's reduction to 2 per cent of returned turnover reflected the inspection discrepancy and surrounding facts, with no legal error or arbitrariness established. For 1988-89, stock supported by vouchers and excise seals could not be treated as suppressed stock, while the remaining discrepancy was too small relative to total stock to justify its full addition as unaccounted turnover. The best-judgment estimate was therefore excessive and arbitrary; the assessment was set aside for fresh determination of taxable turnover. Stock variation must have a rational and proportionate connection with suppression proved on inspection. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 23 Nov 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158070