TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (8) TMI 743
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Commercial Tax Tribunal, Bench-I, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") in Second Appeal No. 383 of 2013 for the assessment year 2010-11, whereby the Second appeal of the assessee against the order dated 28.06.2013 of the Additional Commissioner, Grade-2 (Appeals) has been rejected. 3. The controversy leading to the present revision in brief is that the revisionist is a registered dealer under the VAT Act and is carrying on the business of iron and steel (iron scrap etc.) and on an inspection/survey conducted by the Income Tax Department on 06.04.2010, a stock valuing Rs. 27,00,000/- was found to be excess then the stock declared by the assessee. Subsequently, on 28.06.2010, a survey was also conducted by the Special Investi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed before this Court in the instant revision. 6. Learned counsel for the revisionist has laid much stress while challenging the order of the Tribunal that the same is illegal, arbitrary and has been passed without any application of mind inasmuch as the entire finding recorded against the petitioner with regard to the evasion of tax is on the basis of the fact that more stock was found in the premises than what has been recorded in the books of account. He has further submitted that the said finding of fact has been based only on an estimation and not on the basis of actual weight of the Iron products/Iron Scrap. It has further been submitted that without actual weighment the authority could not have come to a conclusion that there was exc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Om Prakash, Director of the revisionist company was present and weight of the stock was informed by him and he even signed on the survey note prepared during the survey operations and therefore in the light of above material the actual weighing of the Iron/Iron Scrap was not done. It was also submitted that even during the search/survey operations conducted by the Income Tax Department similar finding was recorded wherein the revisionist was reported to having more stock than what was recorded in their books of account. 12. The question therefore which arises for consideration in this revision is as to whether tax liability could have been fastened on the revisionist only on the basis of details provided by the Director of the revisionist....