1991 (4) TMI 432

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ertain records, which were referable to the year 1975-76. They were verified with regular accounts, and it was found that they had not accounted for certain receipts. The accounts were therefore found to be not reliable and rejected by the assessing authority. Recourse thereafter was taken to the best of judgment assessment. The turnover determined on the basis of the best of judgment assessment was Rs. 1,26,636, and the taxable turnover was determined at Rs. 1,25,376. After the assessment was completed, it appears, that the succeeding assessing officer was of the view that but for the inspections made by the inspection wing, the assessee would not have brought the suppressed sales to account, and, therefore, he was of the opinion that the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in revision. 3.. The only plea that has been raised before us is the reiteration of the plea that was raised before the first appellate authority. It has been canvassed that the succeeding officer had no jurisdiction to levy penalty under section 12(3) of the Act, since in the original order of assessment, the assessing authority had not levied penalty. Reliance has been placed on State of Madras v. Ramulu Naidu [1965] 16 STC 865 (Mad.) in support of the submission. 4.. The argument raised by learned counsel for the petitioner has no validity after the amendment of section 12(3) by the amending Act 3 of 1972.   By the amendment of section 12(3), the Legislature has provided that as assessing officer could levy penalty even thr....