1996 (4) TMI 426

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssessee. Civil Appeal No. 2749 of 1979 is preferred by the assessee against the very same judgment in so far it goes against him. The matters arise under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act. The assessment years concerned are 1967-68 to 1973-74. The only question is whether the levy of penalty under section 14(3) of the Act is sustainable in the facts of this case or not. The relevant facts are following: The assessee was dealing in paddy and chemical fertilisers. He had not registered himself as a dealer nor had he filed returns in time. An inspection was carried out in his premises on December 9, 1973 and certain materials recovered. It is only after the inspection that the respondent filed the returns. An assessment order was ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pection. It so happened that the turnover disclosed in the return also happened to be identical but that does not make it an assessment on the basis of and accepting the assessment. There are no words in the assessment order to the effect that the return is accepted or showing that the assessment order was based upon the return. On the contrary, the portion extracted hereinabove clearly shows that the order of assessment was based upon the material discovered during the inspection. Merely because the figure of turnover disclosed in the return-which looks rather strange-tallies with the figure of the turnover determined on the basis of the material discovered, it does not mean that it is not a best judgment assessment. Section 14(3) of....