TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (4) TMI 70
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... justified in waiving of the interest which was liable under Section 8(1) on the admitted sale turn over like admitted tax? (iii) Whether the judgment and order passed by the Tribunal is justified ignoring the facts set out in the assessment order which was passed strictly in accordance facts available on records as also the provisions of the Trade Tax Rules ?" 4. It has been submitted by counsel for the revisionist that the respondent /Dealer is engaged in business of betel nuts, catechu, tea, Ilaichi, General merchant etc. A survey was conducted by the Central Excise Department with regard to the business place of M/s Harsingar Gutaka Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Gopal Grinding Industries on 4th and 5th July, 2001 and on the inspection it was found that the owner of the firm M/s Mahesh & Co. (The respondent/Firm) is also the Director of M/s Harshringar Gutka and the respondent/firm supplied the raw material, betel nuts, catechu etc. to M/s Harshringar Gutka Pvt. Ltd. The stock of the respondent/firm was in Satnam Cold Storage and on on inspection 200 bags of betel nuts was found related with M/s Mahesh and Co. 5. The grinding works of the goods sent by M/s Mahesh & Co. was be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent has considered the fact that the owner of the respondent firm is also the Director of M/s Harshringar Gutka Co. and on the basis of the allegations of collusion with regard to evasion of tax with Gopal Grinding Industries and further that the respondent firm has continuously supplied betel nuts without entering the same in the books of accounts. The Tribunal did not accept and the findings of assessing authority as well as first assessing authority while partially allowing the appeal of the assesse. 9. The Tribunal observed that only on the basis of conjectures and surmises the assessment been done and the revisionist has been assessed to tax with regard to goods which were dispatched form Gopal Grinding Industries 10. The second issue which was considered by the Tribunal was with regard to the interests levied on the tax while rejecting form 3 B. In this regard the Tribunal observed that the respondent had submitted Form 3 B dated 5th March, 2004 while the transactions were conducted for the assessment year 2000-2001. The said form 3 B being beyond two years were not liable to be accepted and, therefore, benefit of Form 3B was not admissible to the respondent. 11. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly urged that M/s Gopal Grinding Industries is a separate firm and is is not connected to the opposite parties and the amount of Rs. 12,20,000/- found in cash book was with regard to transactions between various parties who were duly recorded and was in no way connected with sale and purchase of Gutka or any of its ingredients. 17. The Revenue could not justify the nexus between the unaccount fund and cash book and the transaction between various firms with regard to purchase and sale of various ingredients of gutka and, therefore, the first appellate authority came to the conclusion that opposite parties cannot be held to be liable for evasion of taxes and also that the amount found in cash book could not related to the transactions conducted by the opposite parties, therefore, set aside the order of assessing authority in this regard. 18. The first appellate authority concurred with the findings of the assessing authority and rejected the findings of respondents. Considering the aforesaid facts the Tribunal in the second appeal concluded that books of accounts of the respondent has been rejected without any reasonable basis. During inquiry no adverse material was found in t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Tribunal that from the cash book maintained by the assessee transaction from the date 3.7.2000 to 15.11.2000 the cash of Rs. 12,20,000/- found could not be said to be related to any transaction and nor the said transaction has been pointed out in the assessing order and, therefore, no adverse interference in this case can be made against the assessee and, therefore, the additions made were set aside. 23. No fact could be placed by the State which can persuade this Court to take a view different from the view recorded by the Tribunal and, therefore, this question is answered in favour of the assessee as against the the respondent. 24. The second question relates to the additions made by the Assessing Officer while rejecting Form 3 Kha as from 3.1.1991 to 5.3.2004 which are not valid for the assessment year 2000-01. The Assessing Officer has levied interest payable on the admitted sale turnover as if it was admitted tax. The Tribunal while allowing the appeal of the assessee has upheld the imposition of tax but waived off all the interest imposed on the said tax. It is the case of the assessee that the turnover in the return was not admitted and, therefore, interest under ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e matter of precaution dealer might have realized the tax but that is not relevant at this juncture because the section does not provide any such thing as bona fide dispute. This had been the view taken by the Supreme Court as well as in the case of Commissioner Sales Tax v. M/s.Qureshi Cruciblc Centre, 1993 U.P.T.C. 901(8): A.I.R. 1994. S.C. 25, after having referred to the observations of the learned Single Judge of our High Court in the revision which reads as under: 'There have been no finding by the Tribunal that the assessee acted mala fide in not depositing the tax at the rate 7 per cent. The demand of interest was not justified.' Their Lordships observed: "We are unable to see any relevance of the mala fides in the case, Section 8 (1) does not say that the non-payment should be mala fide. This is also not a case where the rate of tax applicable was in dispute or disputed by the dealers. This is simply a case where the dealer calculated the tax at an inapplicable rate. He did not and could not plead ignorance of the change in rate of tax selected two years earlier. In the circumstances, the concept of such mala fide was not relevant in the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ure has provided special relief to certain manufacturers upon the fulfillment of the conditions mentioned therein for manufacture of specified goods. A manufacturer holding the recognition certificate shall be liable to pay tax at the concessional rate or be wholly or partially exempted from tax on the purchase of raw material or packing material, as may be notified in the gazette of the State Government in that behalf. Clause (b) of section 4B (1) gives relief to a selling dealer to such manufacturers holding recognition certificate on furnishing by the selling dealer the prescribed form which is form 3-B. 29. The Rule 25-B is the relevant rule which prescribes the document 3-B the requisite form to be furnished by such manufacturer to its selling dealer to avail the benefit of concessional rate of tax or tax at nil rate, as the case may be. Rule 25-B is reproduced hereinbelow:- "Rule 25-B. Authority from which Declaration Forms may be obtained; use custody and maintenance of records of such Forms and matters incidental thereto. (1) Where a dealer holding a recognition certificate purchases any goods referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 4-B,....