9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1983 (11) TMI 272 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax
Issues:
1. Tax levied on transactions under the gift scheme. 2. Turnover determined based on entries in the seized book. 3. Legality of the penalty imposed. Analysis: Issue 1: Tax on transactions under the gift scheme The petitioner, a registered dealer, engaged in the manufacture of furniture, was assessed for suppressing sales turnover under a gift scheme. The scheme involved members paying monthly amounts with a chance to win steel almirahs. The Court analyzed the scheme's terms, finding two agreements: one for participation in lots and another for receiving an almirah after 20 months. Sales to lucky winners were excluded, but sales to the remaining members were considered taxable turnover as an independent agreement for sale existed. The Court upheld the assessment on the turnover from these sales. Issue 2: Turnover based on entries in the seized book The assessing authority estimated a turnover based on entries in a seized book, including canceled orders. The petitioner claimed that canceled orders were wrongly included without evidence of execution. However, the Court noted that the book explicitly mentioned canceled orders, and the petitioner failed to provide additional proof. The Court excluded the amount related to canceled orders from the suppressed turnover, affirming the authority's decision on this issue. Issue 3: Legality of the penalty imposed The petitioner was penalized for suppressing sales turnover, which was discovered through a seized diary. Despite reducing the suppressed turnover and providing relief under the benefit scheme, the Court found the penalty justified but opted to reduce it by fifty percent. The Court modified the penalty amount accordingly and directed the assessing authority to issue a revised demand notice, with instructions to refund any excess penalty already recovered. In conclusion, the Court partially allowed the revision petition, modifying the orders and reducing the penalty imposed. The judgment clarified the taxability of turnover under the gift scheme and the treatment of canceled orders in the assessment process.
|
