2001 (3) TMI 1009

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ation. It is stated that the petitioner is the second seller and hence, it is not liable to pay tax. The only liability is under turnover tax. For the said period, petitioner disclosed sales turnover to the tune of Rs. 1,18,82,933.50. During the relevant period, there was an inspection at the place of business by the sales tax department, on December 10, 1993. The books of account were verified with the SIR and the department came to the conclusion that there was excess stock worked out to Rs. 4,226 and shortage of Rs. 3,295. The total variation thus comes to Rs. 7,521. Considering the quantity dealt with by the petitioner during the year, the suppression according to the petitioner would come to .006 per cent. According to the petitioner, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....arding the addition to be made to the total turnover. The original authority took into account the profit, kist amount, etc., and on that basis, calculated the turnover. But the appellate authority held that addition should be five time of the actual suppressed turnover. When the matter came up before the Tribunal, the Tribunal restored the judgment of the assessing authority and set aside the order of the appellate authority. Learned counsel submitted that it was not right on the part of the assessing authority to take into account the kist amount also in calculating the suppressed turnover. Further, it is stated that, what is relevant for best judgment assessment is what was the assessment that has escaped. Learned Government pleader brou....