TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (11) TMI 652
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d in this tax case: "Whether the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in their finding that the assessee failed to prove the conditions for claiming return of tax paid in respect of articles returned by the purchaser?" The petitioner is an assessee on the file of the Commercial Tax Officer, Guindy Assessment Circle. In respect of the assessment year 1995-96, the assessee has reported a total and taxable turnover of Rs. 19,64,527 and Rs. 17,00,200, respectively. There was an inspection in the business premises of the assessee by the officials of the enforcement wing on January 5, 1996 and in the said inspection, it was found that the petitioner has effected sales of machinery as per invoice Nos. 382 and 383 for a sum of Rs. 10,31,000....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....om the letter dated September 11, 1995 of TIIC Ltd., Erode that they have given an undertaking to the appellant that they would make payment of Rs. 8,05,100 against the supply of machinery and equipment to Sri Poly Pipes. The said letter also indicated that TIIC have already forwarded three demand drafts taken by Sri Poly Pipes for a sum of Rs. 4,50,000 against supply of goods covered by invoice Nos. 382 and 383 dated October 19, 1995. However, the assessee was not able to prove the return of goods by Sri Poly Pipes and as such, the explanation given by the assessee was not acceptable to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The appellate authority also found that it was only after the inspection by the enforcement wing on January 5, 1996 t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he suppression was detected by the enforcement wing officials that the assessee came up with revised returns incorporating the sales so made in the month of October, 1995 and paid the amount. In such view of the matter, the Tribunal confirmed the assessment made by the assessing officer as confirmed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. With respect to penalty, the Tribunal found that there were no materials to levy penalty at the maximum rate and accordingly, the penalty was levied on the difference of tax paid as per return of tax and as per the order of assessment. Accordingly, penalty was re-determined at 75 per cent of the balance amount of Rs. 34,617 and a sum of Rs. 25,963 was determined as the penalty due. Aggrieved by the orde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot entitled to claim refund. It is found from the assessment order that a revised return was filed by the assessee for the month of October, 1995 on January 19, 1996, declaring turnover of Rs. 12,42,500, which was omitted to be included in the returns originally filed. The dealers have also paid sales tax on the said sales turnover and accordingly, the assessment order was finalized by the assessing authority. Even though there were materials to show that the goods were actually supplied by the assessee to Sri Poly Pipes and payment were also made in respect of such sales, there were no acceptable materials produced by the assessee before the authorities below as well as before the Tribunal to show that the sale was in fact cancelled and t....