1999 (8) TMI 938

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... P. VENKATARAMA REDDI, J.-The petitioner questions the action of the respondent in collecting the compounding fee of Rs. 11,319 at the time of inspection of the business premises on July 3, 1984. The only contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the maximum compounding fee which could have been collected is Rs. 1,000 at the relevant point of time and the respondent exce....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ged against the petitioner was "incorrect maintenance of accounts" which falls within clause (c) of section 30(1). There is nothing in the notice or the proceedings recorded by the respondent to indicate that there was failure to pay or the evasion of any tax recoverable under the Act. On the other hand, the specific irregularity pointed out against the petitioner is the incorrect maintenance o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....case. Secondly, though there are observations that the failure to maintain correct accounts is also one form of evasion of tax liability, ultimately the decision rests on the ratio that the inspecting authority arrived at the suppressed turnover which was otherwise taxable. But, there is no such finding in the instant case. What all the inspecting officer did was to note the value of the stock var....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uadri, J., observed as follows: "It would be evident from a reading of the order of composition that the composition amount was collected not on the ground that a taxable transaction has taken place and that the tax payable in that behalf was being evaded, or was not paid, but on the ground that the petitioner had issued spurious sale bills in order to hoodwink the department, without actually ....