9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1978 (6) TMI 163 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax
Issues:
Assessment based on best judgment method, imposition of penalty under section 12(3) of the Act for wilful suppression of sales turnover, review of penalty by Deputy Commissioner in suo motu revision, Tribunal's authority to cancel penalty imposed by Deputy Commissioner. Analysis: The case involved the assessing authority assessing the respondent to a taxable turnover of Rs. 7,19,237.11 based on the best judgment method under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The Deputy Commissioner, in a suo motu revision, imposed a penalty of Rs. 2,061 on the respondent for wilful suppression of sales turnover, equating to the tax due on the "suppressed turnover" of Rs. 58,901.75. The Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Madurai, overturned the penalty imposed by the Deputy Commissioner, stating that each case must be decided on its own merits. The Tribunal found that there was no clear finding of wilful suppression by the assessing authority, leading to the cancellation of the penalty. The High Court observed that the assessing authority's best judgment method is not automatically indicative of wilful suppression of sales turnover by the assessee. The Deputy Commissioner, in his revisional power, exceeded his limits by assuming wilful suppression without a direct finding to support it. The Tribunal held that the Deputy Commissioner overstepped his authority in imposing the penalty as if he were the original authority, leading to the correction of the penalty order. The Court concurred with the Tribunal's decision, stating that there was no evidence of wilful suppression of taxable turnover, thus dismissing the tax case. In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the petition, upholding the Tribunal's decision to cancel the penalty imposed by the Deputy Commissioner. The judgment emphasized the importance of a clear finding of wilful suppression before imposing penalties under the Act, highlighting the need for assessments to be based on concrete evidence rather than assumptions.
|
