1983 (11) TMI 124

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... He had been assessed to tax since past so many years. Since the assessee was registered under the H.P. Sales Tax Act, 1968, and he was considered a dealer of medicines also, he was required to pay sales tax and he paid the same in a sum of Rs. 27,731 right from the assessment years 1968-69 to 1975-76. However, the assessee under the Sales Tax Act, disputed the levy of sales tax contending that he is only a medical practitioner and not a dealer in medicines and he was lucky enough to succeed in respect of his contentions and a sum of Rs. 27,731 was refunded to him during the accounting year ended 31-3-1976 which is relevant to the assessment year under consideration. The ITO subjected the said amount to tax under section 41(1). 3. When ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the fact that in all the profit and loss accounts pertaining to the assessment years 1969-70 to 1975-76 the assessee had on the debit side of the respective profit and loss account claimed sales tax amounts which in all amounts to Rs. 27,734. This is also a fact that none of the assessments has been framed as best judgment assessment or by application of rates of tax or by resorting to estimate of gross receipts from the medical profession. No doubt, income returned has been enhanced by the ITO year after year but all the assessments are framed under section 143(3) of the Act and the ITO in all the years up to 1975-76 took into consideration the net income disclosed by the assessee for all the earlier years as per profit and loss account in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ee and allowed by the ITO for all the earlier years as he framed the respective assessments on the basis of the said profit and loss account. The reliance of the learned authorised representative for the assessee on the Madhya Pradesh High Court judgment in the case of Naubatram Nandram v. CIT [1972] 86 ITR 805 is again misplaced because in that case the income-tax authorities calculated profits on the basis of estimated sales as the figures disclosing sales in timber for each year given by the assessee were not accepted. In that case, in the computation of profit there was never any occasion for the making of any allowance or deduction in the assessment for any year. Apparently, facts of the instant case are quite different. Their Lordship....