TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (4) TMI 1248
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....No. MZ-377 of 2006 Chirag Agency v. State of Bihar), whereby the learned Tribunal has dismissed the appeal and affirmed the orders of the two authorities below. The appellant has framed the following substantial questions of law for consideration in the present appeal: "(i) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, simply because the selling company does not issue 'tax invoice' instantly and instead thereof it issue firstly D.O. (Delivery Order), could be a ground to establish concealment of purchase and sales and evade the tax with the connivance of the selling company, especially when the inspecting team found said D.O. in the records of selling company duly recorded? (ii) Whether the learned Tribunal was right and co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cial Tax Officer as well as its confirmation by the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals), in spite of the fact that there could be no concealment of any purchase or sales because tax payable was already collected with the price of goods by the selling company in advance on July 25, 2005 before issuance of delivery order?" A brief statement of facts essential for the disposal of this appeal may be indicated. The assessee (the appellant) is a wholesale dealer in fertilizer supplied by M/s. Oswal Chemical and Fertilizer Limited. On July 26, 2005, the authorities under the Act had conducted a search and seizure in the premises of the assessee under the provisions of Chapter VIII of the Act. The authorities noticed that four sales o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....jected this explanation and found that the same has purposely not been entered in the stock register to evade the liability under the Act. This has been concurrently found by all the three quasi-judicial authorities including the Tribunal. The learned Tribunal has found as follows: "Heard the learned counsels of both sides and perused the records. It is manifest that goods purchased on the basis of D.O. No. 266/92 dated July 25, 2005 was not entered in the books of accounts by the petitioner up to July 26, 2005 till the time of inspection. Neither cash memos nor bills were issued by the selling company in favour of petitioner which clearly proves the intention of the petitioner of concealing the purchase and sales and evade the tax with th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....held therein that the High Court in exercise of its second appellate jurisdiction normally accepts all findings of facts recorded by the first appellate authority, being a forum of facts. Adequacy of materials or possibility of another view on facts is no ground for the High Court to entertain a second appeal. High Court can on facts interfere only after it reaches the conclusion that, in view of the materials on record, no person duly instructed in law can reach that conclusion. In other words, it is not possible to reach the conclusion as has been arrived at by the first appellate court. This court also noticed the position that second appeal under section 100 of the Code of Civil procedure is the third forum for the appellant, whereas th....