TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (10) TMI 1525
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, (hereinafter referred to as 'KVAT Act' for short) and to set aside the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Audit and Recovery), Hubballi, dated 27.03.2013 and restore the re-assessment dated 01.01.2013 made under Section 39(1) of the KVAT Act by the prescribed authority for the tax periods falling in the financial year 2011-12. 2. It is the case of the appellant that the appellant is a registered dealer under the KVAT Act and also registered dealer under Central Sales Tax Act, 1957, (hereinafter referred to as 'CST Act' for short) and he is a proprietor of M/s. Meharwade General Stores, near Janata Bazar, Gadag, who is dealing in grains, groceries, arecanut, tobacco and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion 39 (1) read with Rule 46 of the KVAT Act on 01.01.2013. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, the present appellant filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority under the provisions of Section 62 (6) of the KVAT Act. The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, after hearing both the parties, by an order dated 27.03.2013 set aside the order passed by the original authority. The Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes-Revision Authority exercised its power vested under the provisions of Section 64(1) of the KVAT Act and initiated suo-muto revision proceedings and issued notice to the present appellant. 5. In response to the said notice/endorsement the representatives of the appellant appeared before the Revisional Authority and after he....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ow the appeal. 8. In support of his contention, the learned counsel for the appellant relied upon the dictum of this Court in the case of the Commissioner of Income Tax & another Vs. Namdari Seeds reported in 2011 SCC On Line Kar 1150. It was the case where the Original Authority or the Income Tax Officer acting in accordance with law makes certain assessment and the same cannot be branded as erroneous by the Commissioner simply because, according to him, the order should have been written more elaborately. We respectfully agree with the law declared by this court in the said judgment to the facts of that case, where the Original Authority passed an original order based on the material available on record. Merely because the different view....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... record, carefully. 11. It is undisputed fact that the present appellant is a registered dealer under the KVAT Act and wholesale and retail dealer in areca nut, tobacco products, pickles, matches, chocolate, sainted supari etc. In order to verify the returns of income filed by the Assessee, as compared to the books of accounts for the year 2011-12, the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes under the C.A.S has issued proposition notice for visit audit. The Assessee appeared on 06.12.2012 and produced the books of accounts, related documents, other information and VAT returns in Form VAT-100. On verification, it was noticed that the Assessee effected sales and purchase of goods during the assessment year giving details of opening stock purchase ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....be noted that the facts found in the compounding proceedings before the intelligence authority may not themselves be material in the assessment proceedings and further held that the respondent solely relying on the intelligence report without placing any further material on record for estimation, is unsustainable. The estimation of sale is to be restricted to an extent of purchase turnover reported by the intelligence authority. Therefore, the Appellate Authority set aside the order passed by the Original Authority and directed the respondent - Original Authority to issue revised demand notice to the Assessee, accordingly. 14. The Revisional Authority after issuing notice to the Assessee and considering the entire material on record, recor....