2008 (8) TMI 851

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 18, 1987. The said disclosed firing period was not accepted by the assessing authority in view of the fact that in surveys dated April 13, 1987 and July 18, 1987 the account books were not found on the spot. The explanation submitted by the dealer that as none of the partners of the firm was present at the time of survey, the account books could not have been produced before the surveying officer, has been rejected. While rejecting the disclosed firing period the assessing authority fixed it at 98 days, i.e., from April 1, 1987 to July 7, 1987. It is not in dispute that the brick-kiln has been finally closed down with effect from September 30, 1987 due to some differences among its partners. The assessment order was challenged in appeal....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he claims of distribution of 2,92,520 and 2,19,390 bricks for self use in the contribution of houses of two other partners, namely, Sri Khaliq Hussain and Sri Ramesh Chandra despite the fact that certificates given by Nagar Palika, Fatehpur and respective Gram Pradhan were on record? 5.. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally justified in determining the average sale rate of Rs. 400 per thousand of bricks without appreciating the quality of bricks produced and relying on an exemplar whose situation of the kiln has not been mentioned? Shri M.M. Rai, the learned counsel appearing for the dealer-applicant submits that the authorities below were not justified in rejecting the account books due....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....On the facts and circumstances of the present case, the explanation given by the dealer having not been accepted, I find that the rejection of the account books is perfectly justified. Then, it was contended that the firing period fixed by the Tribunal at 91 days is without any basis. He submits that in a relevant assessment year the brick-kiln was fired on April 11, 1987. It was found by the surveying officer that the chamber up to 95 lines was filled up with baked bricks. The Tribunal concluded that it is not possible to bake the bricks to such a large quantity within seven days if the firing, as stated, started on, April 11, 1987 is correct. Challenging the aforesaid approach of the Tribunal the learned counsel invited attention of th....