TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1969 (6) TMI 41
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essee Sri Laxmi Satyanarayana Rice Mill a firm dealing in paddy and its by-products, barn and chittu at Kolakalur filed its return for the year 1957-58 showing a gross turnover of Rs. 1,91,907-14-6. The assessing authority found that the firm in its return failed to account for 30 bags of paddy purchased on 6th August, 1957. Further, in view of the results obtained by a "test-check-cum-muster roll method" as regards the capacity of the mill also, it reached the conclusion that the turnover entered in the return for that year was grossly low. It, therefore, believed that the return was incomplete and incorrect and proceeded to determine the turnover and make the assessment to the best of its judgment. For determining the true turnover, the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ity and that the working capacity of the mill only for 4 or 5 hours a day was ascertained. Multiplying the turnover as determined in the experiment made by the number of days on which attendance was marked for the workers who worked on "jalladu" the total capacity of the mill in converting paddy into rice was determined. The results showed that the return submitted indicated a grossly low out-turn. On the question whether a "test-check-cum-muster roll method" experiment was a reliable method of ascertaining the correct annual output, the Tribunal said that this test was permissible by law and the assessing authority was at liberty to adopt any method which would help him in coming to a correct conclusion. It was open to him to resolve how a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions in all such cases. The contention of Mr. Rajeswara Rao is that this is the only case which could not get the benefit of the G.O. as it related to the year 1957-58. He, however, reiterates the contention that was taken on behalf of the assessee before the appellate authority and also the Appellate Tribunal that the method adopted is not a satisfactory method and indeed that was the reason why this method was not followed for the previous assessment years. It is also argued that even for the later years, this method was not adhered to. This position is more or less conceded by the learned Government Pleader who states that in later years, the Government provided for a more effective measure by introducing rule 45-A to ascertain the capac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....revious years were withdrawn and this method was even discarded after a short while. If much hardship was caused to the assessees in relation to the revision of previous assessments, there is no reason why the same results would not follow in relation to subsequent assessments as well, if the same method is adopted. One would do well to bear in mind that the capacity of the mill would not be uniform and is bound to vary from paddy to paddy and also the capacity of the workers will not remain the same throughout the day. There are various other elements which this test does not take into account and does not make allowance therefor. Therefore, as this test evidently leads to results which are calculated to work hardship, we think the conclus....