2019 (10) TMI 41

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....wed the assessee's appeal and granted reduction in tax Rs. 1 lakh (under the U.P. Act) and Rs. 3 lakhs (under the Central Act). 2. The present revisions have been pressed on the following questions of law: "(i) Whether the Trade Tax Tribunal was legally justified in not allowing the appeal of the assessing authority and not accepting the books of account of the revisionist? (ii) Whether the Tribunal was legally justified in law in categorically recording a finding in favour of the revisionist that even that the time of seizure no responsible person was available nor the correct physical verification and physical weighment has been carried out by the surveying authority even then believing the survey report partly in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....4.7 crores. 6. The first appeal authority reduced the same to Rs. 60 lakhs under the Central Act and Rs. 20 lakhs under the U.P. Act. Upon further appeal, the Tribunal has reduced the estimation of turnover of undisclosed sales under the U.P. Act to Rs. 10 lakhs and Rs. 30 lakhs under the Central Act. 7. Heard Sri Praveen Kumar, learned counsel for the assessee and Sri B.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the revenue. 8. Assailing the order of the Tribunal, learned counsel for the assessee submits that the Tribunal had itself accepted the fact that there was no material discovered during the survey of any undisclosed sales performed by the assessee. It has also accepted the fact that the stock was not physically verified but r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat noted by the survey authority at 10,250 kgs. In that regard, the Tribunal took note of the fact that the number of bags had been counted being 175. Keeping in mind that and other factors that remained undenied, the Tribunal itself made an estimation of the undisclosed stock of that commodity at 2000 kgs. The same was found to be a material discrepancy in the accounts of the assessee. 11. Besides the Tribunal also did not accept the explanation furnished by the assessee with respect to the loose parchas found at the time of survey with respect to 'dibbi' and 'wastage'. Thus, it appears that the Tribunal has sustained the finding on rejection of books of accounts based on consideration and material existing on rec....