TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (11) TMI 764
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inafter referred to as "the Act") for the year 1978-79 was completed by the Additional Sales Tax Officer, IInd Circle, Kollam, as per order dated November 20, 1981 (annexure C) determining the taxable turnover at Rs. 88,15,169.68. The petitioner is mainly aggrieved by the inclusion of a turnover of Rs. 27,95,463 under raw nut purchase in Kerala and an addition of Rs. 13,97,731.50 being 50 per cent of the said purchase to cover up probable omissions and suppressions and an addition of Rs. 44,92,135.18 representing alleged consignment sales of kernels processed out of such unaccounted purchases. The petitioner therefore filed appeal against the assessment order before the Additional Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Agricultural Income-tax a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pointed out that the assessing authority, for the simple reason that there is discrepancy in the amount shown in annexures A and B, took the stand that annexure A would clearly establish the local purchase made in the State of Kerala and included the turnover of local purchase of raw nuts to the tune of Rs. 27,95,463 in the assessment under the Act. Counsel also submitted that there is absolutely no justification for adding 50 per cent of the said amount towards probable omissions and suppressions. The counsel further submitted that there is absolutely no justification for including a turnover of Rs. 44,92,135.18 as unaccounted sales turnover of cashew kernels within Kerala. 3.. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent submi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in this case relates to two items: (1) With regard to the inclusion of an amount of Rs. 27,95,463 and the addition of 50 per cent of the said amount towards probable omissions and suppressions and (2) addition of a sum of Rs. 42,50,400 towards sales suppression. As regards the first item the case of the petitioner is that he did not purchase raw nuts locally in the State of Kerala, that during the relevant period the raw cashewnuts could be purchased only through the canalising agency since the State had resorted to monopoly procurement of local raw cashewnuts and alloted the same in specific quotas to the processing factories in the State. The petitioner has also got a case that annexure A profit and loss account relates to the transaction....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e 111) has stated that "besides the purchase in Tamil Nadu the dealers have also effected purchases of cashew nuts and kernels at their Head Office at Quilon within Kerala State and have also imported African nuts to the tune of Rs. 7,17,960". The appellate authority had accordingly rejected the contention of the assessee and confirmed the addition made by the assessing authority. The Appellate Tribunal agreed with the findings of the first appellate authority and confirmed the additions made by the assessing authority. We find that the first appellate authority has given cogent reasons for upholding the additions. Though the counsel for the petitioner repeated the same arguments as advanced before the authorities and the Tribunal, on the f....