TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (12) TMI 297
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iced are that the assessee filed returns showing a miscellaneous income of one crore in one year and Rs. 44,37,000/- in the second year. The assessee did not show it as taxable turnover under the sales tax act nor did the assessee explain the source of such income. The Assessing Officer under the sales tax act, added on such income as taxable turnover after adding gross profit. The assessee was in appeal and the Tribunal remanded the matter. The Tribunal relied on P. C. Ittymathew & Sons v. Dy. Commissioner of Sales Tax [2000(9) SCC 318]. The Assessing Authority was directed to conduct an enquiry as to whether there is a transaction of sale, which alone would attract levy of Sales Tax. The assessee was also directed to furnish details showi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on on the ground of the Assessing Officer having not conducted an enquiry and relied on supporting materials to find the transaction to be assessable to Sales Tax; especially in the context of the assessee having taken a specific plea of the income being derived from Real Estate Business which the assessee failed to prove by production of sufficient documents or materials? iii)Whether on taking a specific contention on the income derived from Real Estate business, was it not obligatory on the part of the assessee to have proved the same before the Assessing Officer and in the context of the same having not been proved could the Assessing Officer be faulted for presuming that the income is one derived out of sale of Foreign Liquor; the onl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ns of law we have to look at the decisions placed on record, which prima facie would indicate that unless there was sufficient material to show that a particular transaction was one of sale of goods, there could be no turn over addition made for the purpose of imposition of Sales Tax. The Honourable Supreme Court in the various decisions cited has drawn a clear distinction between taxation under the Income Tax Act and the Sales Tax Act. Girdhari Lal Nannelal (supra) was a case in which there was a cash credit detected in the books of accounts, of Rs.10,000/- in the name of the wife of one of the partners. The contention taken before the Assessing Officer was that the said amounts were paid by the partner to his wife for the purpose of enter....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lal and P. C. Ittymathew (both supra) did not consider the issue of a specific provision casting the burden of proof on the assessee Haleema Zubair (supra) considered it. That too the specific provision in the KGST Act being Section 12. Section 12 reads as under: "Burden of proof:- (1) The burden of proving that any transaction of a dealer is not liable to tax under this Act shall lie on such dealer. " 8. Section 12 was found to be a reverse burden imposed on the assessee, by the Honourable Supreme Court in Haleema Zubair (supra). This does not absolve the liability of the State, since the burden under the general law is squarely on the State to prove that there is a taxable transaction; as has been held in Cooperative Company Ltd. Vs. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see claimed to be from real estate business. When the said contention was not proved before the Assessing Officer there was absolutely no necessity for the Assessing Officer to make a further enquiry since the income could then have been generated only from the transactions in the dealership which definitely attracts sales tax. We garner support to the said view from a decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in C. I. T Vs Best & Co. (P) Ltd. AIR 1966 SC 1325 and the following paragraph: "6. At this stage the question of burden of proof raised at the Bar may be noted. In (1965) 57 ITR 400: (AIR 1966 SC 54), this Court observed: " . . . . . . . . it must in the first instance be observed that it is for the revenue to establish that a pa....